Author Topic: 2020 POTUS Candidates  (Read 277913 times)

redbirdfan

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 141
  • Location: Seattle
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2550 on: March 10, 2020, 11:03:36 PM »
Quote
Yeah, he may be your pretty average 77 year old.  It may not be any more dementia than "normal" at that age.  But I kind of think we need someone better than that to lead our country, don't you?  Someone who can string together coherent sentences and doesn't have gaffes every 5 minutes.  I know Trump has set a pretty low bar, but I'm really amazed that this is the best democrats can do.  They're all in on the "Obama's VP" train.  Anything to avoid having a democratic socialist.  I'm pretty sure the DNC would prefer Trump over Bernie.

I know Bernie is even older.  This was my main hesitation in supporting him.  But he can talk for hours about his proposed policies.  He almost never loses his train of thought (maybe because he's talked about this stuff incessantly for 30 years?).  He's not being bought out by billionaires and lobbyists like literally every other candidate.  I know his socialist ideas are scary to some, but he's at least trying to address some of the major problems we're facing.  Do people really think it's ok that our politicians are bought out?  That people are dying in our rich country from lack of healthcare?  That our homeless population is growing and people working full-time can't afford basic necessities.  The only thing I've learned from Biden is that he thinks he can beat Trump.  Oh and he has more hair than he thinks he does.  And of course OBAMA!!  Whereas Bernie brings up "massive income and wealth inequality" and M4A and corruption every chance he gets.

I liked several other candidates in the race.  But between Bernie and Biden, Bernie wins by a mile for me.  Sadly, I appear to be in the minority.  It's not looking good for Bernie so far tonight.  Doing poorly in Michigan means he probably doesn't have much hope.  I'm still looking forward to the debate on Sunday.  I think the differences will become increasingly clear when it's just one-on-one.  Doubt it'll make a difference though.

It depends on what your goal is.  I think there is a disconnect between yelling about an issue and actually taking meaningful steps to solve the issue.  Bringing up massive income and wealth inequality doesn't actually address the issue.  I know gradual steps aren't sexy.  I know it's easier to yell about corruption and rigged systems than it is to work towards fixing them.  The truth of the matter is that unless a president can get bills through the House and Senate, everything else is irrelevant.  Joe Biden might not be the most articulate person, and he may have lost a step or two, but he can pick up the phone and meet with Republicans to take incremental steps forward.  Bernie doesn't have the political capital necessary to push through his agenda.  He has gladly thumbed his nose at the establishment of both parties for his entire career.  That makes him a darling of the disenchanted, but it has its consequences.  He's seeing that now. 

Obamacare isn't perfect, but we are one step closer to being able to tack on a public option which will get us one step closer to whatever people think Medicare for All is.  That vote required people to sacrifice their political careers.  Do you honestly think Berne has that kind of pull?  Do you honestly believe that House members and Senators aren't dependent upon lobbyists to stay in office?  Obamacare was only passed because it had the semi-blessing of the insurance lobby.  That didn't make it corrupt, that made it passable.  Who do you think is going to go to bat for M4A right now?  Who do think will go to bat for any of the policies supported by Sanders.  Keep in mind that with him at the top of the ticket, you significantly decrease your chances of maintaining the House or retaking the Senate. 

I understand that younger voters view things through rose-colored glasses.  I get it.  But politics is about getting things done in backrooms and scratching the backs of the people whose votes you'll need.  Bernie has shown no ability to moderate.  He's shown no ability to prevent the perfect from being the enemy of the good.  Compromise is what it takes to actually move the ball forward in a way that sticks.  You get Obamacare w/o the public option passed and make the country fall in love with coverage for pre-existing conditions, coverage until 26 and expanded Medicaid.  You slowly move the Overton window.  That's how the game is played.  I could give a beep about whether Bernie can say the same thing over and over for 4 hours let alone 40 years.  That's sound and fury signifying nothing.  I'll take the boring guy with the smaller rallies who can actually move the needle every time.  Biden doesn't give me goosebumps, but I do respect him and I don't fear him.  In this election, I'll take it. 

Could Biden be a better candidate - absolutely.  Would a Bernie presidency be more productive than a Biden one in any measurable way - absolutely not. 


American GenX

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2551 on: March 11, 2020, 05:44:41 AM »
Could Biden be a better candidate - absolutely.  Would a Bernie presidency be more productive than a Biden one in any measurable way - absolutely not.

I think anyone can be a better candidate than they are, but we narrow it down to the best in the end.  I think Bernie would accomplish much less if he were to actually be elected.  For one, he would probably have to work with more republican seats in the house and senate vs. a Biden presidency after losing all those down-ballot races with Bernie at the top of the ticket.  So, it's been a relief these last couple weeks to see Biden doing so well.

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2448
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2552 on: March 11, 2020, 07:08:20 AM »
...I'll take the boring guy with the smaller rallies who can actually move the needle every time...

Well said, to all of it.

I'm not excited about Biden but I am excited about the possibility of getting back on track. And to be clear, "back on track" is not my ideal outcome but it is the best outcome I think we can realistically hope for right now.

It's great that Bernie sees some very real problems and is calling them out. I like and appreciate Bernie as an individual and even as a politician but I think he would be a bad choice as a candidate and a bad choice for president.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2437
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2553 on: March 11, 2020, 07:25:30 AM »
...I'll take the boring guy with the smaller rallies who can actually move the needle every time...

Well said, to all of it.

I'm not excited about Biden but I am excited about the possibility of getting back on track. And to be clear, "back on track" is not my ideal outcome but it is the best outcome I think we can realistically hope for right now.

It's great that Bernie sees some very real problems and is calling them out. I like and appreciate Bernie as an individual and even as a politician but I think he would be a bad choice as a candidate and a bad choice for president.

100% agree.

Biden is more establishment/centrist on some policies than I'd like.  Bernie is considerably further left on MOST policies than I'd like.  But policy positions are not my primary decision driver and I would vote for Bernie if he were the nominee.

My priority is nominating someone who can not only win the presidency (Biden outpolls Bernie against Trump in most of the swing states) but MUCH more importantly, someone who doesn't drag down the Dems on the congressional ticket, particularly in the Senate.  Bernie scares the shit out of me for that reason, not for policy reasons (none of his policies would pass, even with a narrowly held Dem Senate).


partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3901
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2554 on: March 11, 2020, 07:36:30 AM »
My policy positions especially regarding curbing climate change, and universal healthcare agree with Sanders positions more than Biden. BUT- I also have a sense, and maybe other people do, that Sanders hasn't been the most effective at GETTING those positions to reality. In particular being able to make compromises with people across the aisle to make things happen. He hasn't been that effective in getting the youth vote out. I don't blame him. When I was in my early 20's, I'm not sure how many primary elections I voted in either. 
Biden was not my choice. For whatever reason I don't think he takes climate change seriously. I don't think he is invested in universal healthcare like Warren and Sanders are, and we need to rip the bandaid off our current patch work of healthcare coverage.

My only hope is, that Biden gets elected, there is a "blue wave", and he has competent, more progressive people working for him so we can get to a semblance of normal, functioning government as well as move the needle, well if not to progressive, at least back from Handmaid Tale-land we are currently residing.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 09:27:44 AM by partgypsy »

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2555 on: March 11, 2020, 03:01:42 PM »
I think the last few posts have been great points. I know there are several people who have posted here that have been pro-Bernie. I'm really curious if any of you have responses to the points. I have argued against Bernie for specific things on this thread, but they're probably all just symptomatic of the larger problem - he is extreme and seems unwilling to compromise. That sounds good if you are totally on board with his viewpoints, but everyone here who talks in favor of Bernie seems to think that he's way left (or center-left depending on your perspective) but that what he'll end up getting accomplished will be a little left but better than Biden's. The analogy that everyone seems to be using in my mind is a tug of war rope where he's pulling much harder than Biden and although he won't pull it all the way to his position, because he's pulling harder, it will go further left than Biden would. I actually find the arguments above compelling that he might not get it even as far as Biden would because it's not tug of war or maybe a scale from 0-100 where he's starting at a 10, aiming to the left and would get it to a 30 versus Biden starting at a 40 and getting it to 45. Instead, he could easily (assuming he would even beat Trump) sabotage the Dems, causing them to lose the Senate solidly and cost House seats and only push for legislation that has no chance of passing and would lead to nothing getting done versus Biden getting some things left of center actually accomplished. Does any pro-Bernie person have a reason to think this wouldn't be true?

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2556 on: March 11, 2020, 03:52:51 PM »
I think the last few posts have been great points. I know there are several people who have posted here that have been pro-Bernie. I'm really curious if any of you have responses to the points. I have argued against Bernie for specific things on this thread, but they're probably all just symptomatic of the larger problem - he is extreme and seems unwilling to compromise. That sounds good if you are totally on board with his viewpoints, but everyone here who talks in favor of Bernie seems to think that he's way left (or center-left depending on your perspective) but that what he'll end up getting accomplished will be a little left but better than Biden's. The analogy that everyone seems to be using in my mind is a tug of war rope where he's pulling much harder than Biden and although he won't pull it all the way to his position, because he's pulling harder, it will go further left than Biden would. I actually find the arguments above compelling that he might not get it even as far as Biden would because it's not tug of war or maybe a scale from 0-100 where he's starting at a 10, aiming to the left and would get it to a 30 versus Biden starting at a 40 and getting it to 45. Instead, he could easily (assuming he would even beat Trump) sabotage the Dems, causing them to lose the Senate solidly and cost House seats and only push for legislation that has no chance of passing and would lead to nothing getting done versus Biden getting some things left of center actually accomplished. Does any pro-Bernie person have a reason to think this wouldn't be true?

Sure I'll take that on. Most of the previous posts really just sound like parroting media talking points to me. Does anyone here actually have data on what Sanders accomplished in congress vs Biden? Plus, was the stuff that Biden "compromised" on with the GOP worth passing? Biden who voted for the Iraq War and continued to call it the right call even after it came out that the WMDs were a complete fabrication. He also has several other questionable votes with fighting against school busing programs, talking about cutting social security, iraq war, Anita Hill, bailing out the banks of 2008, and has already hinted towards vetoing a bill on expanding medicare?

How many bad votes has Bernie made? How many bad votes that Bernie doesn't currently recognize as bad decisions?

Beyond that Bernie had the highest amendment totals in congress during a republican congress during 1995-2007. And has a generally good legislative effectiveness score including the years under GOP control: https://thelawmakers.org/find-representatives#/

Biden has been claiming that Bernie can't get anything done, but they only overlapped in the Senate during the 07-08 congress when Sanders was a freshman Senator. Biden had been a Senator for 34 years when Bernie was just starting. So of course Biden looks down on Bernie. Freshman legislators do not have the seniority on congressional panels or clout with the other side to push legislation. However, by the end of the Obama years, Bernie was a highly effective Senator. It's only been with McConnell's complete obstruction that all legislation has stopped. And Biden seems to have a naivete about how McConnell is going to magically change when he's president. Bernie however, is not naive to this point.

If Biden is president with a GOP Senate, he get exactly the same amount done as Bernie legislative wise.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1567
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2557 on: March 11, 2020, 04:45:26 PM »
Many people are not overly impressed with either the current president or Mr. Biden.

I wonder if it is too late for a third party candidate to emerge.

I remember Ross Perot.  I remember Nader running.   A strong third party candidate may do well this time around.  That will be particularly true if the economy tanks.

American GenX

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2558 on: March 11, 2020, 04:52:37 PM »
Many people are not overly impressed with either the current president or Mr. Biden.

Many people are not overly impressed with <fill in the blank with the name of any candidate that's ever run>.

A third party candidate just gives one of the main party candidates an advantage by taking more votes away from the other one.

OzzieandHarriet

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2559 on: March 11, 2020, 05:30:36 PM »
Many people are not overly impressed with either the current president or Mr. Biden.

I wonder if it is too late for a third party candidate to emerge.

I remember Ross Perot.  I remember Nader running.   A strong third party candidate may do well this time around.  That will be particularly true if the economy tanks.

NOOOO!

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2284
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2560 on: March 11, 2020, 06:26:46 PM »
There is no groundswell for "democratic socialism" in the US.  Bernie only got followers because they thought he was going to give them (20 somethings) free shit.  Now that the gravy train dream is over they will probably not even vote in the general election.  The few that do vote half would probably vote for Trump because they want to tear down the system.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 07:27:41 PM by jim555 »

Vapour

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2561 on: March 11, 2020, 07:13:40 PM »
In the end, I think it's this simple:
If you believe in Bernie's ideas, then vote for him.  If you think his ideas are too extreme, then don't.

I'm kind of sick of hearing about how unelectable Bernie is and how he'll hurt the down ballot races or he'll be a less effective president because he won't compromise.  Because we just don't know that.  I think people are voting more out of fear rather than for what they believe in.  In a race where Bernie can beat Biden in the primary and go on to beat Trump, I think that would mean that America is ready for and supportive of the kind of sweeping change that Bernie is proposing.  Bernie is good at rallying people and making them aware of systemic issues in our country.  Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.  I'm not saying he'll pass everything he's campaigning on, but I think some may be underestimating what a Sanders win would mean.  It'd mean rejection of the status quo.  It'd mean people excited about potential change.  I think that could move the needle a lot more than carrying on as is.  Maybe people don't believe he can get anything done because he wouldn't get it done in the same way any president would have before him.  I don't think that's a bad thing.  The way things are in Washington now is clearly not working and another slightly left of center candidate who clearly isn't all "with it" isn't going to change things.

Now, I'm not saying that's the reality we live in.  Obviously Biden has been beating Bernie quite decisively the last 2 weeks.  I think Michigan was Bernie's last hope and obviously that didn't go well last night.  I guess that means either people are rejecting Bernie's ideas or they've been listening to the media about how unelectable Bernie is and went with the safe choice.  I just hope you're all right that Biden can beat Trump, we can take the Senate and keep the house, and pass incremental changes towards healthcare as a human right, a livable minimum wage, addressing climate change, paid family leave, getting money out of politics, affordable college, criminal justice reform, gun reform, and on and on and on.  We've got a lot to work on...

I like what Bernie said at the end of the last debate:
Quote
The misconception, and you're hearing it here tonight, is that the ideas I'm talking about are radical. They're not. In one form or another, they exist in countries all over the world. Health care is a human right. We have the necessity, the moral imperative, to address the existential threat of climate change. Other countries are doing that. We don't need more people in jail, disproportionately African-American, than any other country on earth -- not a radical idea. The motto, the saying that moves me the most is from Nelson Mandela. And Mandela said, "Everything is impossible until it happens."  And that means, if we have the guts to stand up to powerful special interests who are doing phenomenally well; if we can bring working people together, black and white and Latino, we can create a nation where all people have a good standard of living.

Maybe I've got my rose-colored glasses on and am living in a fantasy world.  But I'm going to continue to fight for what I believe is right.  And that means voting for a candidate who has the values I do, even if there's a chance he might lose to Trump for being a socialist or bring down all other democrats just by being on the ballot.  I won't vote out of fear.  Because if everyone would do the same, maybe we'd have a chance for real change in this country.

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 966
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2562 on: March 11, 2020, 07:21:52 PM »
  I just hope you're all right that Biden can beat Trump, we can take the Senate and keep the house,...

Has anyone in this thread or anywhere on the internet said this? I don't think this is a probable event, but I've not seen any articles or math on it.

American GenX

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2563 on: March 11, 2020, 08:17:41 PM »
  I just hope you're all right that Biden can beat Trump, we can take the Senate and keep the house,...

Has anyone in this thread or anywhere on the internet said this? I don't think this is a probable event, but I've not seen any articles or math on it.

I don't know if that's been mentioned in this thread or other threads on MMM, but I have seen some articles on the possibility, not that it's likely, but certainly not out of reach, either.   The odds are better with Biden than with Bernie at the top of the ticket, though.

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4516
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2564 on: March 11, 2020, 08:24:22 PM »
If Biden wins, the Dems would need to flip 5 seats to control the senate. Realistically six because Doug Jones will almost certainly lose in Alabama.

They are probably favored to win in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine.

They have halfway decent shots in Iowa, North Carolina, and Georgia.

It'd be a stretch, but not outside the realm of possibility.


pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1567
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2565 on: March 11, 2020, 08:26:27 PM »
It's been said that people want to vote for Bernie because he will give "free" things.

So, what will Joe Biden do for me?  What does Joe really stand for?

It's not hard to tell with Bernie.

So - Next Fall it will be a choice between an old man who waves his arms and says things will be terrific and an old man who wants to beat the other guy and runs on the coat tails of another.

Vapour

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2566 on: March 11, 2020, 08:27:46 PM »
  I just hope you're all right that Biden can beat Trump, we can take the Senate and keep the house,...

Has anyone in this thread or anywhere on the internet said this? I don't think this is a probable event, but I've not seen any articles or math on it.
Well I don't think that anyone has said that exactly, but they said that Bernie will make us lose the Senate and house, so I was reading between the lines...

In reality, the chances are not great but it's not impossible.  The outlook is more hopeful that it was the last time I checked a year or so ago.  There are about twice as many Republican seats up for re-election.  Doug Jones is a pretty vulnerable Democrat in Alabama but most others seem pretty safe.  There's real potential for taking seats in Colorado, Arizona, Maine, NC, and recently Montana with Bullock running.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2437
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2567 on: March 11, 2020, 09:28:08 PM »
  I just hope you're all right that Biden can beat Trump, we can take the Senate and keep the house,...

Has anyone in this thread or anywhere on the internet said this? I don't think this is a probable event, but I've not seen any articles or math on it.
Well I don't think that anyone has said that exactly, but they said that Bernie will make us lose the Senate and house, so I was reading between the lines...

In reality, the chances are not great but it's not impossible.  The outlook is more hopeful that it was the last time I checked a year or so ago.  There are about twice as many Republican seats up for re-election.  Doug Jones is a pretty vulnerable Democrat in Alabama but most others seem pretty safe.  There's real potential for taking seats in Colorado, Arizona, Maine, NC, and recently Montana with Bullock running.

Yeah, there's a big difference between believing Biden will win us the Senate (possible but unlikely) and being pretty damn sure Bernie would not only ensure no chance at the Senate, but also lose us a bunch of House seats picked up in swing districts in the last election (very likely).  I want to do everything possible to prevent the latter.

Freedom2016

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 689
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2568 on: March 11, 2020, 09:28:20 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

Vapour

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2569 on: March 11, 2020, 09:34:24 PM »
It's been said that people want to vote for Bernie because he will give "free" things.
Not everyone supports Bernie just because they want free things but because they believe it's what's right.  Some of us would like to see money taken out of politics.  We'd like it so the people serving our food have paid sick leave so they're not tempted to go to work when they have coronavirus.  We believe healthcare is a human right.  We believe someone working 40 hours a week has the right to make enough money to survive.  I don't think these things are free.  Tax me to pay for it.  Tax businesses more.  Tax the 3 wealthiest people in this country who have more wealth than the bottom HALF of Americans.

So, what will Joe Biden do for me?  What does Joe really stand for?

It's not hard to tell with Bernie.

So - Next Fall it will be a choice between an old man who waves his arms and says things will be terrific and an old man who wants to beat the other guy and runs on the coat tails of another.
That's my question.  From what I can tell, he stands for: being Obama's VP, being able to beat Trump, and not being a socialist.

I guess the best I can hope for at this point is that he beats Trump and helps carry the rest of ticket to big wins in the House and Senate and we actually pass some decent laws.  Like adding a public option to Obamacare and universal background checks, both of which seem to have a lot of support even among moderates.  And hopefully we can start addressing climate change before it's too late...

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2570 on: March 11, 2020, 09:35:11 PM »
If Biden wins, the Dems would need to flip 5 seats to control the senate. Realistically six because Doug Jones will almost certainly lose in Alabama.

They are probably favored to win in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine.

They have halfway decent shots in Iowa, North Carolina, and Georgia.

It'd be a stretch, but not outside the realm of possibility.

The Senate is 53-47. Assuming no Doug Jones 54-46. So that would be a 4/5 for with/without Dem. VP.

As Vapour said, Montana should be in play for the Senate as well.

At a stretch I think Dems should also put resources in Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 09:38:20 PM by FIPurpose »

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2437
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2571 on: March 11, 2020, 09:41:50 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that. 

maizeman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4516
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2572 on: March 11, 2020, 09:47:58 PM »
If Biden wins, the Dems would need to flip 5 seats to control the senate. Realistically six because Doug Jones will almost certainly lose in Alabama.

They are probably favored to win in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine.

They have halfway decent shots in Iowa, North Carolina, and Georgia.

It'd be a stretch, but not outside the realm of possibility.

The Senate is 53-47. Assuming no Doug Jones 54-46. So that would be a 4/5 for with/without Dem. VP.

As Vapour said, Montana should be in play for the Senate as well.

At a stretch I think Dems should also put resources in Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas.

Oh right you are! There are currently 45 democrats in the senate, but I forgot about the two independents (King and Sanders).

So picking up Arizona, Colorado, and Maine would mean the democrats only need to go 1/4 from Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, and Montana (I agree having Bullock running now is enough to put that state in play). That makes things much more encouraging.

I don't think Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas will be the decisive seats for control on the senate, but in a wave election Texas could definitely be in play. Kansas if Kobach gets the republican nomination, if not, I don't know that it'd be worth putting resources into.

Georgia is probably about as promising as Texas though. With the right nominee the open seat there might be within reach in a wave election.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2573 on: March 11, 2020, 09:58:51 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that.

There have been policy exit polls at almost every state. Medicare for all has polled popularly in every state so far:
VT: 73%/23%
ME: 69%/28%
TX: 63%/33%
MN: 62%/35%
CO: 57%/36%
CA: 57%/36%
NC: 55%/41%
OK: 53%/43%
TN: 52%/44%
AL: 51%/43%
VA: 52%/45%
MA: 50%/45%

Vapour

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2574 on: March 11, 2020, 10:14:43 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.
True, but with a strong leader who has the backbone to constantly hold them accountable and the will of the people on his side, maybe things would be different.

Keep in mind here, I said this was in a world where Bernie won the Dem nomination and the general election against Trump.  I think the only way Bernie wins is if people overwhelmingly reject the status quo and more or less go all in on his proposals.  In this case, I think he might have more support for his policies than a general, moderate, establishment candidate.  And he might be able to use that support to sway congress more than an establishment candidate would.  This is in my fantasy, idealistic, world.  I understand that it's not reality and that it's clear America is not ready for the policies Bernie's been promoting.  I still think the Democratic party has benefited significantly from Bernie's presidential runs and bringing these issues into the minds of voters.  There's a lot more talk of M4A than there was 5-6 years ago.  Now at least the public option seems like such a no-brainer when it was not feasible when Obamacare passed.  Maybe we'll slowly make our way there, but only if strong candidates like Bernie and Warren keep pushing us to progress.

redbirdfan

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 141
  • Location: Seattle
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2575 on: March 11, 2020, 10:21:32 PM »
I don't think Sanders' supporters have any idea what would happen if Sanders' policies went into effect.  What does Medicare For All mean?  Bernie has never addressed how he would pay for it.  Does that mean that the government gets to tell you which procedures you can or cannot have and there is no recourse?  Does it mean the government is forced to cover medically dubious procedures that are not necessarily cost effective?  What would that mean for doctors, nurses, the entire private insurance industry, medical malpractice, taxes, etc.  What does free college mean?  How do professors get paid?  What happens to state schools?  How do you prevent income inequality?  Do you simply raise taxes on the rich?  Do you prevent the rich from basing their companies/residences abroad?  How do employers pay for sick leave for employees and also pay the wages of the worker filling in?  Most companies don't operate so far in the black that increases in taxes aren't a big deal.  I don't think Sanders' supporters understand how businesses work.  Yes, you have extremely rich companies like Amazon, Google, etc.  They are the exception.  Most business already pay a ton of taxes and expenses before any money hits the employee's hand.  FICA, federal income taxes, state income taxes, state and local taxes, unemployment insurance, health care costs, liability insurance, and rent all come off the top before you even factor in wages.  Those built in costs go up (sometimes significantly) every year before every worker starts requesting raises.  Bernie's proposals are romantic in a vacuum, but they completely fail to take economic realities into consideration.     

Bernie Sanders has no probable path to the nomination.  I admire the grassroots movement that he put together and the passion of his supporters.     I'm a moderate Republican.  In terms of actual votes I think Biden would do better gaining moderate Republicans than he would tacking left.  Revolutionaries by definition are less likely to use the system to vote.  They are more prone to apathy and attacks than putting in the work to effect real change.  If Sanders is still in the race on April 1st it will prove that his main goal isn't defeating Trump.  I'm still not sure why there are debates about Biden's mental acuity when Sanders actually had a heart attack and has refused to release his medical records.  That kinda seems like a big deal to me.  Anyway, I don't see how trying to rough up Joe Biden in debates or trying to make Joe Biden publicly adopt a more liberal platform ahead of the general election is helpful.  We know Bernie didn't vote for the war.  Got it.  What are his current thoughts on foreign policy???? One vote taken nearly 20 years ago shouldn't be what he falls back on.  The country knows what Bernie stands for and it has been rejected.  I don't think the result will be differently in the states coming up.  Just my $.02. 
 

Vapour

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2576 on: March 11, 2020, 10:22:08 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that. 
Yeah, I think his doing poorly in the race since the moderates consolidated shows that there is NOT currently the kind of support for his proposals.  Either that or people are just scared.  My point was only that if he DID get elected, that would therefore mean he had popular support and could likely use that more effectively than has been done in the past to possibly get some things done.

That's good to see the exit polls for M4A are looking positive though.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1447
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2577 on: March 11, 2020, 10:24:25 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that.

There have been policy exit polls at almost every state. Medicare for all has polled popularly in every state so far:
VT: 73%/23%
ME: 69%/28%
TX: 63%/33%
MN: 62%/35%
CO: 57%/36%
CA: 57%/36%
NC: 55%/41%
OK: 53%/43%
TN: 52%/44%
AL: 51%/43%
VA: 52%/45%
MA: 50%/45%

Is this all voters or just Dems?  Even if all voters, with there not being a competitive Rep primary and in many states no Repub primary at all, this is not an accurate picture of the view of the average voter. 

Even so, this is slightly more favorable that I had heard for Medicare for All among Dems in recent opinion polling.

Vapour

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2578 on: March 11, 2020, 10:54:08 PM »
I don't think Sanders' supporters have any idea what would happen if Sanders' policies went into effect.  What does Medicare For All mean?  Bernie has never addressed how he would pay for it.  Does that mean that the government gets to tell you which procedures you can or cannot have and there is no recourse?  Does it mean the government is forced to cover medically dubious procedures that are not necessarily cost effective?  What would that mean for doctors, nurses, the entire private insurance industry, medical malpractice, taxes, etc.   
This is BS.  He's absolutely addressed how he will pay for his proposals.  See here: https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/

Now, you can disagree on the numbers, or disagree on what methods he's using to pay for it, or be upset that you'd have to pay more tax but stop saying he hasn't addressed it.  Economists have said the M4A will actually save money by getting rid of insurance companies and all the middle-men and allowing us to negotiate with drug companies.

And guess what, all other major countries have some form of government-run healthcare.  They all seem to be able to figure out these issues that are just so impossible in the US.  Yes, it'd be a radical change to our system.  But guess what, a for-profit healthcare industry isn't working.  It's one area where capitalism doesn't really work.  When you either pay for treatment or die, it's not exactly a free market.  It's quite hard when you're bleeding out or having a heart attack to shop around for the best rate on your medical care.  Obamacare was a great step forward and a public option would be another great step.  But I think eliminating the insurance companies is the best long-term solution. 

Bernie Sanders has no probable path to the nomination.  I admire the grassroots movement that he put together and the passion of his supporters.     I'm a moderate Republican.  In terms of actual votes I think Biden would do better gaining moderate Republicans than he would tacking left.  Revolutionaries by definition are less likely to use the system to vote.  They are more prone to apathy and attacks than putting in the work to effect real change.  If Sanders is still in the race on April 1st it will prove that his main goal isn't defeating Trump.  I'm still not sure why there are debates about Biden's mental acuity when Sanders actually had a heart attack and has refused to release his medical records.  That kinda seems like a big deal to me.  Anyway, I don't see how trying to rough up Joe Biden in debates or trying to make Joe Biden publicly adopt a more liberal platform ahead of the general election is helpful.  We know Bernie didn't vote for the war.  Got it.  What are his current thoughts on foreign policy???? One vote taken nearly 20 years ago shouldn't be what he falls back on.  The country knows what Bernie stands for and it has been rejected.  I don't think the result will be differently in the states coming up.  Just my $.02. 
 
Yeah, I agree with you here (mostly).  Bernie is pretty much toast and Biden's best path forward is to appeal to moderate Republicans who dislike Trump.  But the reason Biden's mental acuity scares me a lot more than Bernie's heart attack is because being president is a job that requires a hell of a lot of mental acuity.  Or at least it was before Trump.  It needs a person who is smart, thoughtful, decisive, and dare I say, coherent.  If Biden's mental state deteriorates in the next 4 years, what will happen?  Will he step down if it gets bad?  Or keep running the country while not being fully with it?  Whereas if Bernie has another heart attack or physical health issue, it's probably pretty binary as to whether or not he's fit to continue leading the country.  That's not to say Bernie couldn't deteriorate mentally or Biden couldn't have a physical health issue either.  Either way we're all in on having an old white dude running this country so Biden better choose a good VP.

American GenX

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2579 on: March 12, 2020, 04:57:39 AM »

"Crazy" Bernie should step aside now so everyone consolidates around Biden.

I'm not concerned at all about Biden's mental acuity.  Some people are making a big deal out of his stuttering and occasional gaffes which he has been known for, but it's really a non-issue when it comes to making decisions as president.

secondcor521

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2830
  • Age: 51
  • Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Big cattle, no hat.
    • Age of Eon - Overwatch player videos
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2580 on: March 12, 2020, 09:27:48 AM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that.

There have been policy exit polls at almost every state. Medicare for all has polled popularly in every state so far:
VT: 73%/23%
ME: 69%/28%
TX: 63%/33%
MN: 62%/35%
CO: 57%/36%
CA: 57%/36%
NC: 55%/41%
OK: 53%/43%
TN: 52%/44%
AL: 51%/43%
VA: 52%/45%
MA: 50%/45%

Is this all voters or just Dems?  Even if all voters, with there not being a competitive Rep primary and in many states no Repub primary at all, this is not an accurate picture of the view of the average voter. 

Even so, this is slightly more favorable that I had heard for Medicare for All among Dems in recent opinion polling.

Not 100% sure, but I believe they are exit polls from Democratic primaries and caucuses, so probably 95%+ Democrats.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2437
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2581 on: March 12, 2020, 10:17:50 AM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that.

There have been policy exit polls at almost every state. Medicare for all has polled popularly in every state so far:
VT: 73%/23%
ME: 69%/28%
TX: 63%/33%
MN: 62%/35%
CO: 57%/36%
CA: 57%/36%
NC: 55%/41%
OK: 53%/43%
TN: 52%/44%
AL: 51%/43%
VA: 52%/45%
MA: 50%/45%

But is that with the caveat that it would mean the end of private insurance?  If you asked me, "Do you support Medicare for all", technically I'd say "Yes, absolutely".  But I mean that I strongly support a public option of Medicare-type plans being made available to all, not Sander's version of Medicare for all.

If you asked me, "Do you want to make college more affordable?", I'd say "Yes, absolutely." And I have some ideas about what I'd like to see, but I don't support making college free.

That's the kind of nuance that I'm wondering about, whether that was at play in the primaries and accounts for a big chunk of Sander's super Tuesday face-plant.

Etc.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2582 on: March 12, 2020, 10:27:56 AM »
I think the last few posts have been great points. I know there are several people who have posted here that have been pro-Bernie. I'm really curious if any of you have responses to the points. I have argued against Bernie for specific things on this thread, but they're probably all just symptomatic of the larger problem - he is extreme and seems unwilling to compromise. That sounds good if you are totally on board with his viewpoints, but everyone here who talks in favor of Bernie seems to think that he's way left (or center-left depending on your perspective) but that what he'll end up getting accomplished will be a little left but better than Biden's. The analogy that everyone seems to be using in my mind is a tug of war rope where he's pulling much harder than Biden and although he won't pull it all the way to his position, because he's pulling harder, it will go further left than Biden would. I actually find the arguments above compelling that he might not get it even as far as Biden would because it's not tug of war or maybe a scale from 0-100 where he's starting at a 10, aiming to the left and would get it to a 30 versus Biden starting at a 40 and getting it to 45. Instead, he could easily (assuming he would even beat Trump) sabotage the Dems, causing them to lose the Senate solidly and cost House seats and only push for legislation that has no chance of passing and would lead to nothing getting done versus Biden getting some things left of center actually accomplished. Does any pro-Bernie person have a reason to think this wouldn't be true?

Sure I'll take that on. Most of the previous posts really just sound like parroting media talking points to me. Does anyone here actually have data on what Sanders accomplished in congress vs Biden? Plus, was the stuff that Biden "compromised" on with the GOP worth passing? Biden who voted for the Iraq War and continued to call it the right call even after it came out that the WMDs were a complete fabrication. He also has several other questionable votes with fighting against school busing programs, talking about cutting social security, iraq war, Anita Hill, bailing out the banks of 2008, and has already hinted towards vetoing a bill on expanding medicare?

How many bad votes has Bernie made? How many bad votes that Bernie doesn't currently recognize as bad decisions?

Beyond that Bernie had the highest amendment totals in congress during a republican congress during 1995-2007. And has a generally good legislative effectiveness score including the years under GOP control: https://thelawmakers.org/find-representatives#/

Biden has been claiming that Bernie can't get anything done, but they only overlapped in the Senate during the 07-08 congress when Sanders was a freshman Senator. Biden had been a Senator for 34 years when Bernie was just starting. So of course Biden looks down on Bernie. Freshman legislators do not have the seniority on congressional panels or clout with the other side to push legislation. However, by the end of the Obama years, Bernie was a highly effective Senator. It's only been with McConnell's complete obstruction that all legislation has stopped. And Biden seems to have a naivete about how McConnell is going to magically change when he's president. Bernie however, is not naive to this point.

If Biden is president with a GOP Senate, he get exactly the same amount done as Bernie legislative wise.

I'm not as worried about a few individual votes Biden made that people don't like - he's been there for decades. Some votes won't please everyone. Fair point though, about Bernie's amendment total. Thanks for the info.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2583 on: March 12, 2020, 10:30:28 AM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that.

There have been policy exit polls at almost every state. Medicare for all has polled popularly in every state so far:
VT: 73%/23%
ME: 69%/28%
TX: 63%/33%
MN: 62%/35%
CO: 57%/36%
CA: 57%/36%
NC: 55%/41%
OK: 53%/43%
TN: 52%/44%
AL: 51%/43%
VA: 52%/45%
MA: 50%/45%

But is that with the caveat that it would mean the end of private insurance?  If you asked me, "Do you support Medicare for all", technically I'd say "Yes, absolutely".  But I mean that I strongly support a public option of Medicare-type plans being made available to all, not Sander's version of Medicare for all.

If you asked me, "Do you want to make college more affordable?", I'd say "Yes, absolutely." And I have some ideas about what I'd like to see, but I don't support making college free.

That's the kind of nuance that I'm wondering about, whether that was at play in the primaries and accounts for a big chunk of Sander's super Tuesday face-plant.

Etc.

Do people realize that these are all easily googlable questions? Look it up and contribute to the thread instead of just throwing questions out there that are easily looked up

The medicare question was: "Do you support a single government health insurance plan for all?"

BlueMR2

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2032
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2584 on: March 12, 2020, 10:58:17 AM »
As an independent I'm really disappointed to see Bernie losing now.  I didn't agree with a lot of what he said, but I felt he was at least a reasonable, intelligent person, and he is who I would have voted for.  Biden is neither.  He was a terrible VP, and I have zero confidence in him in any kind of leadership position.  If it comes down to Biden vs. Trump, I'll be going Trump as the least unreasonable of the two.

I'll save for later my rant about the sheer arrogance and tonedeafness of the DNC and how they took the success with Obama as a mandate to pursue a course that teeters on self-destruction.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 556
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2585 on: March 12, 2020, 11:00:03 AM »
As an independent I'm really disappointed to see Bernie losing now.  I didn't agree with a lot of what he said, but I felt he was at least a reasonable, intelligent person, and he is who I would have voted for.  Biden is neither.  He was a terrible VP, and I have zero confidence in him in any kind of leadership position.  If it comes down to Biden vs. Trump, I'll be going Trump as the least unreasonable of the two.

I'll save for later my rant about the sheer arrogance and tonedeafness of the DNC and how they took the success with Obama as a mandate to pursue a course that teeters on self-destruction.

This viewpoint leaves me very confused.

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 748
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Dallas
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2586 on: March 12, 2020, 11:03:24 AM »
Good to see this thread return to healthy discussion and debate.

Bernie's recent press conference seemed to really strike a conciliatory tone. I think Biden's likely the nominee, and while I think Bernie personally supported Clinton, I feel like this go around he's doing a better job of (hopefully) keeping his base engaged even if/when he doesn't get the nomination. By all rights, continue to hold Biden's and the party's feet to the fire for the issues that matter to his base.

I do worry that both Biden and Bernie seem reluctant to remove the filibuster. The next Democratic president + Democratic Congress needs to do that, admit DC and PR (pending their approval) as states, and start the hard work of instituting more democratic reforms. This was the real reason why I really liked Warren, I felt she alone seemed to get that everything else right now is secondary. Still hope that she's VP or her people are tapped for high level administration positions.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2587 on: March 12, 2020, 11:31:34 AM »
As an independent I'm really disappointed to see Bernie losing now.  I didn't agree with a lot of what he said, but I felt he was at least a reasonable, intelligent person, and he is who I would have voted for.  Biden is neither.  He was a terrible VP, and I have zero confidence in him in any kind of leadership position.  If it comes down to Biden vs. Trump, I'll be going Trump as the least unreasonable of the two.

I'll save for later my rant about the sheer arrogance and tonedeafness of the DNC and how they took the success with Obama as a mandate to pursue a course that teeters on self-destruction.

This viewpoint leaves me very confused.

This is why people who continue to claim that there are "lanes" that candidates run in don't actually make sense when you start talking to actual voters. Also why a "centerist" like Biden shouldn't automatically be assumed to get more votes than Bernie in a GE.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1447
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2588 on: March 12, 2020, 12:19:15 PM »

I do worry that both Biden and Bernie seem reluctant to remove the filibuster. The next Democratic president + Democratic Congress needs to do that, admit DC and PR (pending their approval) as states, and start the hard work of instituting more democratic reforms. This was the real reason why I really liked Warren, I felt she alone seemed to get that everything else right now is secondary. Still hope that she's VP or her people are tapped for high level administration positions.

Exactly this.  Plus, add at least two more Supreme Court justices.  9 is not a magic number, is not in the Constitution and is not the number that the court has had throughout history.  And it is needed after the Merrick Garland fiasco.

wenchsenior

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2437
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2589 on: March 12, 2020, 12:24:13 PM »
Even if he's been totally ineffective in getting things done (which isn't true), he has succeeded in moving the democrats further to the left by showing democrats the popularity that these ideas have with the people.  He can use that power as president to convince congress to support his ideas as they'd be backed by the people.

I haven't seen a lot of evidence that Congress is moved by such arguments - see, e.g. common sense gun regulation, health care reform.

And I'm really curious just how popular Sanders' proposals actually are among the bulk of even likely Dem voters (not just the young, twitter-activist crowd).   Not his speeches (he can be an effective communicator), or his righteous populist rage (which I sometimes share), or his inclinations toward dis-empowering big companies and the utra-rich (compelling).  But his actual POLICY proposals.  I admire Sanders and sympathize with quite a few of his goals, while strongly objecting to many of his specific proposals.   I suspect there are a lot of Dem-leaning voters who feel similar, but I haven't seen specific data on this point as pertains to specific policies (except that Medicare for all is not popular among most voters if you clarify that it means the end of your private/employer provided insurance).  I can infer by his electoral failure in the primary that most voters are not up for the specifics of his revolution, but I don't absolutely know that policy is driving that.

There have been policy exit polls at almost every state. Medicare for all has polled popularly in every state so far:
VT: 73%/23%
ME: 69%/28%
TX: 63%/33%
MN: 62%/35%
CO: 57%/36%
CA: 57%/36%
NC: 55%/41%
OK: 53%/43%
TN: 52%/44%
AL: 51%/43%
VA: 52%/45%
MA: 50%/45%

But is that with the caveat that it would mean the end of private insurance?  If you asked me, "Do you support Medicare for all", technically I'd say "Yes, absolutely".  But I mean that I strongly support a public option of Medicare-type plans being made available to all, not Sander's version of Medicare for all.

If you asked me, "Do you want to make college more affordable?", I'd say "Yes, absolutely." And I have some ideas about what I'd like to see, but I don't support making college free.

That's the kind of nuance that I'm wondering about, whether that was at play in the primaries and accounts for a big chunk of Sander's super Tuesday face-plant.

Etc.

Do people realize that these are all easily googlable questions? Look it up and contribute to the thread instead of just throwing questions out there that are easily looked up

The medicare question was: "Do you support a single government health insurance plan for all?"

Duly noted, thread enforcer.

YttriumNitrate

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 952
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2590 on: March 12, 2020, 12:35:39 PM »
I do worry that both Biden and Bernie seem reluctant to remove the filibuster. The next Democratic president + Democratic Congress needs to do that, admit DC and PR (pending their approval) as states, and start the hard work of instituting more democratic reforms. This was the real reason why I really liked Warren, I felt she alone seemed to get that everything else right now is secondary. Still hope that she's VP or her people are tapped for high level administration positions.
Exactly this.  Plus, add at least two more Supreme Court justices.  9 is not a magic number, is not in the Constitution and is not the number that the court has had throughout history.  And it is needed after the Merrick Garland fiasco.

Plans like these are great ... until the other side regains power and does the same.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1447
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2591 on: March 12, 2020, 12:41:49 PM »
I do worry that both Biden and Bernie seem reluctant to remove the filibuster. The next Democratic president + Democratic Congress needs to do that, admit DC and PR (pending their approval) as states, and start the hard work of instituting more democratic reforms. This was the real reason why I really liked Warren, I felt she alone seemed to get that everything else right now is secondary. Still hope that she's VP or her people are tapped for high level administration positions.
Exactly this.  Plus, add at least two more Supreme Court justices.  9 is not a magic number, is not in the Constitution and is not the number that the court has had throughout history.  And it is needed after the Merrick Garland fiasco.

Plans like these are great ... until the other side regains power and does the same.

Yep.  Too bad the Republicans didn't consider that before they refused to even meet with Garland.  Assuming the Dems do ever get back in power, moves like those recommended above are needed to, at the very least, signal that what Rs did to Garland won't be tolerated.  To not take any action to correct for it is to endorse and approve of what they did. 

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 966
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2592 on: March 12, 2020, 12:52:20 PM »
If Biden wins, the Dems would need to flip 5 seats to control the senate. Realistically six because Doug Jones will almost certainly lose in Alabama.

They are probably favored to win in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine.

They have halfway decent shots in Iowa, North Carolina, and Georgia.

It'd be a stretch, but not outside the realm of possibility.

The Senate is 53-47. Assuming no Doug Jones 54-46. So that would be a 4/5 for with/without Dem. VP.

As Vapour said, Montana should be in play for the Senate as well.

At a stretch I think Dems should also put resources in Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas.

Oh right you are! There are currently 45 democrats in the senate, but I forgot about the two independents (King and Sanders).

So picking up Arizona, Colorado, and Maine would mean the democrats only need to go 1/4 from Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, and Montana (I agree having Bullock running now is enough to put that state in play). That makes things much more encouraging.

I don't think Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas will be the decisive seats for control on the senate, but in a wave election Texas could definitely be in play. Kansas if Kobach gets the republican nomination, if not, I don't know that it'd be worth putting resources into.

Georgia is probably about as promising as Texas though. With the right nominee the open seat there might be within reach in a wave election.

The primary went to Hegar, a political unknown who was the only candidate to raise 7 figures of money. Cornyn is waaaaaaaaaaaaay more popular in state than Cruz, he has a huge war chest, and I am fairly certain will have the Trump seal of approval. She is a female vet (so she loses some points for the female, but picks some up from the veteran status) with limited to no political background and no experience running a campaign (limited presence and visibility so far, no significant efforts at brand building during primary season). As much as I would like for Cornyn to be shown the door, I don't see it as likely at all.

FIPurpose

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1334
  • Location: WA
    • FI With Purpose
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2593 on: March 12, 2020, 01:25:53 PM »
If Biden wins, the Dems would need to flip 5 seats to control the senate. Realistically six because Doug Jones will almost certainly lose in Alabama.

They are probably favored to win in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine.

They have halfway decent shots in Iowa, North Carolina, and Georgia.

It'd be a stretch, but not outside the realm of possibility.

The Senate is 53-47. Assuming no Doug Jones 54-46. So that would be a 4/5 for with/without Dem. VP.

As Vapour said, Montana should be in play for the Senate as well.

At a stretch I think Dems should also put resources in Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas.

Oh right you are! There are currently 45 democrats in the senate, but I forgot about the two independents (King and Sanders).

So picking up Arizona, Colorado, and Maine would mean the democrats only need to go 1/4 from Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, and Montana (I agree having Bullock running now is enough to put that state in play). That makes things much more encouraging.

I don't think Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas will be the decisive seats for control on the senate, but in a wave election Texas could definitely be in play. Kansas if Kobach gets the republican nomination, if not, I don't know that it'd be worth putting resources into.

Georgia is probably about as promising as Texas though. With the right nominee the open seat there might be within reach in a wave election.

The primary went to Hegar, a political unknown who was the only candidate to raise 7 figures of money. Cornyn is waaaaaaaaaaaaay more popular in state than Cruz, he has a huge war chest, and I am fairly certain will have the Trump seal of approval. She is a female vet (so she loses some points for the female, but picks some up from the veteran status) with limited to no political background and no experience running a campaign (limited presence and visibility so far, no significant efforts at brand building during primary season). As much as I would like for Cornyn to be shown the door, I don't see it as likely at all.

Hmm no. Cornyn is not waaaay more popular: https://morningconsult.com/senator-rankings/
(Yes this is a poll of people on the senators from their own state, not national)

approve/disapprove/don't know
Cruz - 49/34/17
Cornyn - 44/25/31

While Cornyn has numbers good enough to say he's likely for re-election, I wouldn't call him more popular than Ted Cruz. With the way the political winds are blowing, I'd say he'll be re-elected by a similarly close margin as Cruz.

mm1970

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7682
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2594 on: March 12, 2020, 01:41:11 PM »
There is no groundswell for "democratic socialism" in the US.  Bernie only got followers because they thought he was going to give them (20 somethings) free shit.  Now that the gravy train dream is over they will probably not even vote in the general election.  The few that do vote half would probably vote for Trump because they want to tear down the system.
I'm just gonna say that I know a lot of people who are pro Bernie.

None of them are 20-something.  All are over 40, and most are over 60.  They've been working and paying taxes for decades, watching their kids go through high college costs (some), unable to buy homes (some), putting off having children or not having them at all (a lot).  Some of them have watched friends die due to lack of health care, or lose their homes due to medical costs.

These are smart, hard-working, rational people - who happen to like Bernie and what he stands for.  Many of them have been to or have lived in other Democratic socialist countries (think Denmark, Sweden), and realize that it's not rocket science.  It's been done before.

You can agree to disagree (I have, not a Bernie fan), but it's not really accurate to paint all Bernie fans as dumb kids who want free stuff.

PathtoFIRE

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 748
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Dallas
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2595 on: March 12, 2020, 02:02:58 PM »
Hegar hasn't cinched the nomination yet...however her run-off opponent Royce West is probably too "Democratic machine"-like to appeal to Republicans in this state.

sui generis

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1447
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2596 on: March 12, 2020, 04:42:21 PM »
If Biden wins, the Dems would need to flip 5 seats to control the senate. Realistically six because Doug Jones will almost certainly lose in Alabama.

They are probably favored to win in Arizona, Colorado, and Maine.

They have halfway decent shots in Iowa, North Carolina, and Georgia.

It'd be a stretch, but not outside the realm of possibility.

The Senate is 53-47. Assuming no Doug Jones 54-46. So that would be a 4/5 for with/without Dem. VP.

As Vapour said, Montana should be in play for the Senate as well.

At a stretch I think Dems should also put resources in Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas.

Oh right you are! There are currently 45 democrats in the senate, but I forgot about the two independents (King and Sanders).

So picking up Arizona, Colorado, and Maine would mean the democrats only need to go 1/4 from Iowa, North Carolina, Georgia, and Montana (I agree having Bullock running now is enough to put that state in play). That makes things much more encouraging.

I don't think Kansas, Kentucky, and Texas will be the decisive seats for control on the senate, but in a wave election Texas could definitely be in play. Kansas if Kobach gets the republican nomination, if not, I don't know that it'd be worth putting resources into.

Georgia is probably about as promising as Texas though. With the right nominee the open seat there might be within reach in a wave election.

The primary went to Hegar, a political unknown who was the only candidate to raise 7 figures of money. Cornyn is waaaaaaaaaaaaay more popular in state than Cruz, he has a huge war chest, and I am fairly certain will have the Trump seal of approval. She is a female vet (so she loses some points for the female, but picks some up from the veteran status) with limited to no political background and no experience running a campaign (limited presence and visibility so far, no significant efforts at brand building during primary season). As much as I would like for Cornyn to be shown the door, I don't see it as likely at all.

She did run for Congress in 2018, so the bolded isn't correct, but overall agree that this is not a likely flip unless this is a much stronger blue wave than 2018.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2261
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2597 on: March 12, 2020, 09:06:16 PM »

"Crazy" Bernie should step aside now so everyone consolidates around Biden.

I'm not concerned at all about Biden's mental acuity.  Some people are making a big deal out of his stuttering and occasional gaffes which he has been known for, but it's really a non-issue when it comes to making decisions as president.

Yes I think Biden's stutter actually helps to humanize him. And there's an excellent article written by a journalist who also has a stutter and the article helps clarify that some of the gaffes are related to the stutter and are not a sign of mental decline.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/01/joe-biden-stutter-profile/602401/

"Emma Alpern is a 32-year-old copy editor who co-leads the Brooklyn chapter of the National Stuttering Association and co-founded NYC Stutters, which puts on a day-long conference for stuttering de­stigmatization. Alpern told me that she’s on a group text with other stutterers who regularly discuss Biden, and that it’s been “frustrating” to watch the media portray Biden’s speech impediment as a sign of mental decline or dishonesty. “Biden allows that to happen by not naming it for what it is,” she said, though she’s not sure that his presidential candidacy would benefit if he were more forthcoming."

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2882
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2598 on: March 13, 2020, 04:37:24 AM »

I do worry that both Biden and Bernie seem reluctant to remove the filibuster. The next Democratic president + Democratic Congress needs to do that, admit DC and PR (pending their approval) as states, and start the hard work of instituting more democratic reforms. This was the real reason why I really liked Warren, I felt she alone seemed to get that everything else right now is secondary. Still hope that she's VP or her people are tapped for high level administration positions.

Exactly this.  Plus, add at least two more Supreme Court justices.  9 is not a magic number, is not in the Constitution and is not the number that the court has had throughout history.  And it is needed after the Merrick Garland fiasco.

Is there a good reason for increasing the Court size other than "I'm not getting what I want?"

FDR tried to do this with a compliant Congress and was told to pound sand.

sherr

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 824
  • Age: 34
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: 2020 POTUS Candidates
« Reply #2599 on: March 13, 2020, 08:28:02 AM »
Exactly this.  Plus, add at least two more Supreme Court justices.  9 is not a magic number, is not in the Constitution and is not the number that the court has had throughout history.  And it is needed after the Merrick Garland fiasco.

Is there a good reason for increasing the Court size other than "I'm not getting what I want?"

FDR tried to do this with a compliant Congress and was told to pound sand.

I would say "restitution for stealing Merrick Garland's seat" is a good reason.

We have one party that wants to play barly-on-this-side-of-legal political games to steal power? Fine, both parties now have to play that way to make it fair.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2020, 08:30:13 AM by sherr »