2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
If Biden doesn't run, I can see Sanders securing the nomination and doing it with time to spare.
 
Wednesday at Stoke said:
If Biden doesn't run, I can see Sanders securing the nomination and doing it with time to spare.
Click to expand...
Warren will give him a good challenge tbh. She’s progressive enough to garner the admiration of Bernie’s supporters and the DNC will almost certainly favour her over Bern.
 
Kaos said:
Warren will give him a good challenge tbh. She’s progressive enough to garner the admiration of Bernie’s supporters and the DNC will almost certainly favour her over Bern.
Click to expand...

I doubt the DNC is going to pick any favourites after the fiasco of 2016 but I do agree there is potential of one of them being on the other person's ticket.
 
I think Sanders wins the nomination this time.

Enters this race with a far higher profile and incredible momentum. The media will be forced to give him the exposure he needs.

I expect a lot of smears thrown his way though. The anti-socialism stuff already starting and his age is gonna be highlighted non stop. Don’t think it will be enough.
 
Irish Jet said:
I think Sanders wins the nomination this time.

Enters this race with a far higher profile and incredible momentum. The media will be forced to give him the exposure he needs.

I expect a lot of smears thrown his way though. The anti-socialism stuff already starting and his age is gonna be highlighted non stop. Don’t think it will be enough.
Click to expand...

He has a lot of things going for him though. Infrastructure spending, student loan forgiveness etc are pretty popular among both independents and democrats now. Despite his defeat, he succeeded in making those ideas mainstream in 2016 and shifted the US norm towards the left.
 
Wednesday at Stoke said:
He has a lot of things going for him though. Infrastructure spending, student loan forgiveness etc are pretty popular among both independents and democrats now. Despite his defeat, he succeeded in making those ideas mainstream in 2016 and shifted the US norm towards the left.
Click to expand...

Oh I know. He’s only gotten more popular since 2016, especially when Hillary completely bottled the rust belt states Sanders was reaching out to. The idea of him being unelectable come the general election can’t really be used against him this time. I think he’ll wipe out the likes of Warren – He’s the overwhelming favourite among progressive Democratic voters – Will get the endorsements from AOC and the growing left wing movement. Warren is sort of caught in the middle.

I predict it will come down to Sanders and Harris with Sanders winning the nomination.
 
Irish Jet said:
Oh I know. He’s only gotten more popular since 2016, especially when Hillary completely bottled the rust belt states Sanders was reaching out to. The idea of him being unelectable come the general election can’t really be used against him this time. I think he’ll wipe out the likes of Warren – He’s the overwhelming favourite among progressive Democratic voters – Will get the endorsements from AOC and the growing left wing movement. Warren is sort of caught in the middle.

I predict it will come down to Sanders and Harris with Sanders winning the nomination.
Click to expand...

I think Harris and Sanders have similar end game but Harris' proposals are a lot more concrete and she has a niche in writing economic policy that benefits the middle class, Sanders, while very genuine is more scatter-gather in approach albeit a lot more charismatic. It would be interesting to see the race wind down to the two of them.
 
This year, Sanders apologized publicly and privately to former female staffers after allegations of sexual harassment perpetrated by male staffers on his 2016 campaign. He has also continued to stumble on questions about race, despite a years-long effort to improve his standing with minority voters.

The political landscape has shifted since 2015. After a midterm election cycle that saw women and minority candidates sweep to power, the nominating contest is likely to be fought not only over questions of ideology but over identity and electoral strategy. Already, the 2020 candidates are being pushed on how they can appeal to the party’s broad range of demographic groups, which includes working-class families, black and Latino voters, suburban women and millennials.
Click to expand...

The Guardian wasting little time.
 
I can see it now. So many democrats run for nomination that the votes spread thin, the wrong person gets nominated and it all basically hands Trump a second term.
 
Aboutreika18 said:
Just imagining a Bernie-led Labour trouncing the Tories... :drool:
Click to expand...
Meh it didn't work in 2015 it wouldn't work now.

Irish Jet said:
The Guardian wasting little time.
Click to expand...


Already, the 2020 candidates are being pushed on how they can appeal to the party’s broad range of demographic groups, which includes working-class families, black and Latino voters, suburban women and millennials.
Click to expand...

I hate this horse shit of separating class and race. Due to the racist structures of the US, race and class are linked together, so when you talk about class your talking about race and vice versa. And the same can be said pretty of the age now as well, if your a millennial your working class.

If Democratics appealed to the working class of American through even the most basic class politics then they would be in power. But instead they focus on the the shit head suburban women who want more female defence contractors.[/QUOTE]
 
Wednesday at Stoke said:
I think Harris and Sanders have similar end game but Harris' proposals are a lot more concrete and she has a niche in writing economic policy that benefits the middle class, Sanders, while very genuine is more scatter-gather in approach albeit a lot more charismatic. It would be interesting to see the race wind down to the two of them.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is Harris hasn’t announced any plan or proposals as part of her campaign. Her website is actually empty except for the merchandise and donations.
 
Last edited:
o-CORBYN-TWEETS-570.jpg



feck i thought he wasn't going to do it
 
berbatrick said:
Click to expand...


I fecking hate this opinion. It's nonsense. Higher education being free does not mean that everyone gets higher education. It just means that higher education is not to a large degree class gated (or rather it combats that particular problem; statistics show that level of education attained is still significantly tied to parents' level of education, even in otherwise egalitarian Norway).
 
Abizzz said:
But he's lying in the very act of it. His pledge wasn't "I'm with you", his pledges were "build the wall", "lock her up", and "make america great again". I followed the 2016 campaign a lot more than I should have, and maybe I have a selective memory, but I can't remember this soundbite at all. If viewed in isolation it sounds decent, but how can one view it in isolation, given everything else he's said and done? Sadly Clinton was unable to capitalize (or even effectively point out) the irony of a man promising to be "with you" who has left thousands of Americans out of pocket when his companies defaulted, who was a draft dodger, who spent his entire life working towards being on the cover of tabloids to elevate himself above them even more than his privileged birth had already done.

His "I'm with you" is a smack in the face to every intelligent and educated American.
Click to expand...

I think @berbatrick is spot on with his assessment with how Trump is naturally better at the political game than almost any modern Democrat (Obama was better but that's really about it).

One thing I am reminded every day is that the regulars in these CE threads are not even close to representative of the average American I run into even in California. People here are several standard deviations more thoughtful and well informed than the average American.

If you remove Trump's content he really is a natural at the persuasiveness game. When you studied things like coercion, political linguistic framing and all the stuff that Frank Luntz systematically breaks down in his manuals, Trump just naturally does a lot of that because he has been a con man his whole life and all good con men have a preternatural talent for this.

I came across two really masterful con artists when I was in my 20s. I still remember the back of my head thinking "Do not trust this person". Yet both of them have this weird natural charisma that is somehow compelling when you are in the room with them even when you know you shouldn't trust them. The best con artists are like the best magicians being master at sleight of hand but its applied differently. They both had a similar pattern - work their way through a meta-circle of connections in some subculture network ripping off or conning everyone you meet in some way then moving on to the next con in another city.

I've also been to NLP seminars for salesmen that absolutely crave this ability. Hand-to-hand salesmen try to practice this for years. But when you meet these natural con artists its really a talent not a learned trait because you have to be sociopathic to some degree to master it. What these salesmen are taking seminars to try to learn, these two con artists I came across perform naturally this way. Trump is constantly performing lot of linguistics techniques that people who study political language and framing like Luntz on the right and Lakoff on the left are constantly trying to train people to do. Trump is like those natural con artists, he is just effortless in constantly asserting and re-asserting his linguistic frame. Despite the fact that thoughtful and informed people like this thread's regulars see right through it, it still works on the majority of the population that isn't paying as close attention as you are.

These are old tactics too from Goebbels to Ed Bernays (godfather of public relations industry) to Trump these tactics seem obvious but sadly they still work
 
Last edited:
oneniltothearsenal said:
I think @berbatrick is spot on with his assessment with how Trump is naturally better at the political game than almost any modern Democrat (Obama was better but that's really about it).

One thing I am reminded every day is that the regulars in these CE threads are not even close to representative of the average American I run into even in California. People here are several standard deviations more thoughtful and well informed than the average American.

If you remove Trump's content he really is a natural at the persuasiveness game. When you studied things like coercion, political linguistic framing and all the stuff that Frank Luntz systematically breaks down in his manuals, Trump just naturally does a lot of that because he has been a con man his whole life and all good con men have a preternatural talent for this.

I came across two really masterful con artists when I was in my 20s. I still remember the back of my head thinking "Do not trust this person". Yet both of them have this weird natural charisma that is somehow compelling when you are in the room with them even when you know you shouldn't trust them. The best con artists are like the best magicians being master at sleight of hand but its applied differently. They both had a similar pattern - work their way through a meta-circle of connections in some subculture network ripping off or conning everyone you meet in some way then moving on to the next con in another city.

I've also been to NLP seminars for salesmen that absolutely crave this ability. Hand-to-hand salesmen try to practice this for years. But when you meet these natural con artists its really a talent not a learned trait because you have to be sociopathic to some degree to master it. What these salesmen are taking seminars to try to learn, these two con artists I came across perform naturally this way. Trump is constantly performing lot of linguistics techniques that people who study political language and framing like Luntz on the right and Lakoff on the left are constantly trying to train people to do. Trump is like those natural con artists, he is just effortless in constantly asserting and re-asserting his linguistic frame. Despite the fact that thoughtful and informed people like this thread's regulars see right through it, it still works on the majority of the population that isn't paying as close attention as you are.

These are old tactics too from Goebbels to Ed Bernays (godfather of public relations industry) to Trump these tactics seem obvious but sadly they still work
Click to expand...

I won't argue the fact that Trump is a con artist, it's a large (if not deciding factor) in me despising the man to the extent that I do. I'm not as convinced that he is such a perfect one though, I think plenty of people see through him, and I don't even think one needs to be particularly intelligent nor informed to do so. Look at it from another perspective: He has unlimited twitter bots parroting his message, the most viewed television channel is devoted to him, and one of the 2 parties has become completely subservient to him, and yet he's celebrating when his approval rating hits 40!
We (on the other side) sometimes exaggerate his abilities.

He was a better natural populist than Ted Cruz, Bush No.3 and Clinton no.2., I'll give him that. I also think it's quite possible the Dems will mess up the nomination again and set him up against someone similarly lacking in charisma as Hillary, which is why I fear a second term... but that won't make him any better in my eyes. (In all honesty I just think he's the result of a broken system, not the one breaking a working system, even if he does manage to make it a lot worse). Those who voted for Trump to stick 2 fingers to the "establishment" now view him as exactly that (and their situation hasn't changed).


If Bernie gets the nomination I can't see Trump winning more than a handful of states.
 
Sanders is awesome. Can someone more well versed on this stuff explain why he was never a presidential nomination before 2016 (or was he?)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.