- Joined
- Dec 17, 2013
- Messages
- 11,698
- Supports
- Brazil, Arsenal,LA Aztecs
Sanders is centre left at a push. The U.S. has a very skewed political spectrum.
But this is only a US only election.
Its political spectrum is the only one relevant here.
Sanders is centre left at a push. The U.S. has a very skewed political spectrum.
Beto has a chance at nomination. Warren honestly doesn't. She need a big moment to happen to her to have a chance because I can't see her campaign creating one naturally.
Sceptical on Buttigieg's chances myself.I honestly don't think Beto has a chance either. I think it's going to be one of Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg or Harris. Beto had to have a moment, but that moment never really came after he announced. Buttigieg is currently having his. Bernie and Sanders don't need one, and Harris may or may not need one.
Of course, it's 2019. I don't remember who was leading in the polls in the Republican primaries by this time in 2015, but it sure as hell wasn't Trump. Scott Walker was polling at nearly 15%.
Sanders is centre left at a push. The U.S. has a very skewed political spectrum.
Sanders is centre left at a push. The U.S. has a very skewed political spectrum.
I’d say about 5 candidates have a chance of winning the nomination, especially when you consider that early leaders often don’t wind up as the nominee.
Bet it’ll be a white male. We’re going to see people fall back into the “safe zone” scared that any sort of diversity will be perceived as a weak point Trump will dog whistle at and his supporters will bark at.
The Trump dog whistle will be "socialism" and the nominee will be a relatively safe candidate who does not promise immediate upheaval. In some quarters Trump is such an easy man to beat they think 2020 is a chance for generational change. In others they don't want to risk it. I think the latter outnumbers the former.
I notice one thing about Harris that could be very advantageous. She often talks about "needing to have a conversation" about certain issues.
What happens after the conversation? Maybe policy changes, maybe a committee formed to expand the conversation (and buy time).
It's a phrase that is satisfying enough that she acknowledges the issue but vague enough for interpretation and Trump can't attack her for it.
Harris is staunchly tough on guns. That’ll be a huge deal for many voters. It’s crazy that it’s like that There are some serious existential problems in this world and some people prioritize guns above all.The Trump dog whistle will be "socialism" and the nominee will be a relatively safe candidate who does not promise immediate upheaval. In some quarters Trump is such an easy man to beat they think 2020 is a chance for generational change. In others they don't want to risk it. I think the latter outnumbers the former.
I notice one thing about Harris that could be very advantageous. She often talks about "needing to have a conversation" about certain issues.
What happens after the conversation? Maybe policy changes, maybe a committee formed to expand the conversation (and buy time).
It's a phrase that is satisfying enough that she acknowledges the issue but vague enough for interpretation and Trump can't attack her for it.
The Trump dog whistle will be "socialism" and the nominee will be a relatively safe candidate who does not promise immediate upheaval. In some quarters Trump is such an easy man to beat they think 2020 is a chance for generational change. In others they don't want to risk it. I think the latter outnumbers the former.
I notice one thing about Harris that could be very advantageous. She often talks about "needing to have a conversation" about certain issues.
What happens after the conversation? Maybe policy changes, maybe a committee formed to expand the conversation (and buy time).
It's a phrase that is satisfying enough that she acknowledges the issue but vague enough for interpretation and Trump can't attack her for it.
Voting for Biden is just as stupid as voting for Trump.
Among the ideologues on either side of the Dem divide, I'm interested in whether there's a significant portion of the party who are ultimately just interested most in whichever candidate seems strong and looks likely to get Trump out: i.e. people who might hypothetically be on the left, but who'll be incredibly enthusiastic for Biden if he runs a strong campaign, and vice versa. Interesting to think about although don't have any figures on it.
In considering who should be their party’s standard bearer, a majority of 56% prefer someone who would be a strong candidate against Trump even if they disagree with that candidate on most issues. Just 33% say they would prefer a nominee who they are aligned with on the issues even if that person would have a hard time beating Trump. Democratic women (61%) are more likely than men (45%) to say they would put their policy positions aside in order to get a nominee who could beat Trump.
Common sense would tell you ‘electability’ will feature as heavily as it ever has or more so in this climate. I have seen way-too-early numbers on it, I’m guessing at 538...?Among the ideologues on either side of the Dem divide, I'm interested in whether there's a significant portion of the party who are ultimately just interested most in whichever candidate seems strong and looks likely to get Trump out: i.e. people who might hypothetically be on the left, but who'll be incredibly enthusiastic for Biden if he runs a strong campaign, and vice versa. Interesting to think about although don't have any figures on it.
Yes let’s pick the guy from the presidency that led us to Trump. What could go wrong?
I still think its too early to tell. Biden really is offering nothing but then again we are talking about the same voter base that put forward Hilary Clinton as their best person.You say that now but that's likely the choice people may have to contend with.
I think it’s been spelled out plenty of times on why the Obama administration has been a huge disappointment for the working class people. For many voters, voting Trump was a response to that disappointment. So going back to that formula shows no learning has happened. Should Biden get elected, the same problems are going to be ignored as other existential problems pile on top of that, creating more disenfranchisement and leading to more tribalism, potentially leading us to another populist hack on the other side of the spectrum again. Voting Biden is merely delaying the inevitable.That's not very insightful analysis, IMO.
That would be DOA in Congress and will not pass anytime in the next decade. Odd metric for determining a candidate.In a somewhat less insane world anyone not supporting the green new deal would be instantly disregarded as a presidential nominee.
Well then the earth is fecked.That would be DOA in Congress and will not pass anytime in the next decade. Odd metric for determining a candidate.
Voting for Biden is just as stupid as voting for Trump.
If you live in a swing state, I would advise to go vote anyway. Even with a dinosaur like Biden, you still have to consider things like judicial nominations, Paris Climate Accord, and absence of inciting white nationalism. There are also other things to vote on like house members and local referendums.I would definitely stay at home if the options are Biden and Trump. It would be the same shit, but with less twitter shenanigans.
Gonna be a fun race.
I would definitely stay at home if the options are Biden and Trump. It would be the same shit, but with less twitter shenanigans.
Gonna be a fun race.
These fools are at it again