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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Red Dreams said:
Corbyn?

The answer is policies that everyone can identify with.
Health Care, Climate Change, Living Wage and Free university.

Some may not agree with all his policies, but people know him to be an honest
Click to expand...

nimic said:
That's an incredibly lazy comparison.
Click to expand...

I mean that really is pretty much interchangable ... Both are a similar age... Both are on the very left of mainstream politics in their country (or maybe a little too far left to be considered mainstream)

Both would be seen as too far left by many of their political colleagues on the same side

Both talk about energising new voters (note corbyns results and I don't think the Iowa numbers were up much either for Sanders)

So yeah it's really not difficult to draw out similarities
 
sun_tzu said:
on the very right of mainstream politics in their country (or maybe a little too far right to be considered mainstream)

would be seen as too far right by many of their political colleagues on the same side

talk about energising new voters
Click to expand...
Ooh look, with a little change we have the bloke that won the last US election.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Ooh look, with a little change we have the bloke that won the last US election.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s an entirely fair characterization, besides the xenophobic, racist ‘build the wall’, ‘ban the muzzies’ angle (which isn’t actually that radical for at least half of America), Trump’s 2016 platform didn’t deviate much from the established economic doctrines in the US conservative movement. Even the thing that departs from contemporary GOP stances at that point like promising expanded health coverage, no change to popular social programs and isolationism all have roots in American society, and were part of the GOP platform in decades past.

Meanwhile, whether we like it or not, a move to single payer and free college tuition or mobilization towards a green economy are all radical changes that heavily expand the scope of responsibilities/powers of federal authorities, as well as a new class consciousness absent in US society. And so far, only young people are really enthusiastic/susceptible to those ideas, while the older voters are still very much the ‘I’m alright Jack’ type.
 
sun_tzu said:
Sounds remarkably similar to what the Corbyn supporters were saying in the run up to the UK election... I anticipate similar results if Bernie is the nominee

For clarity I think trump probably wins against any of the nominees ... It's just he wins by more against Bernie I think
Click to expand...

I think Bernie would do significantly better for a few reasons, which are beginning to take shape.

1. He's a populist, which means he will almost certainly draw more people to show up to vote
2. His ideas are connected to actual problems people in society are facing - namely the costs of healthcare, education, the cost of living, and the widening wealth gap
3. He's viewed as anti-establishment in an era where voters are increasingly frustrated by the establishment
4. He's very hard to attack because he himself doesn't spend much time attacking others beyond simply listing policy differences.
5. Whoever the Dem nominee is, would benefit from the galvanized Dem desire to get rid of Trump

There are a few cons of course - age, who his VP pick may be, etc. But if we were to assume a Bernie, Buttigieg, Biden final three - only Sanders (as of this moment) would be able to animate a large enough turnout to beat Trump and reclaim the Senate imo.
 
sun_tzu said:
I mean that really is pretty much interchangable ... Both are a similar age... Both are on the very left of mainstream politics in their country (or maybe a little too far left to be considered mainstream)

Both would be seen as too far left by many of their political colleagues on the same side

Both talk about energising new voters (note corbyns results and I don't think the Iowa numbers were up much either for Sanders)

So yeah it's really not difficult to draw out similarities
Click to expand...

very shallow and superficial analysis...and completely wrong.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
I don’t think that’s an entirely fair characterization, besides the xenophobic, racist ‘build the wall’, ‘ban the muzzies’ angle (which isn’t actually that radical for at least half of America), Trump’s 2016 platform didn’t deviate much from the established economic doctrines in the US conservative movement. Even the thing that departs from contemporary GOP stances at that point like promising expanded health coverage, no change to popular social programs and isolationism all have roots in American society, and were part of the GOP platform in decades past.

Meanwhile, whether we like it or not, a move to single payer and free college tuition or mobilization towards a green economy are all radical changes that heavily expand the scope of responsibilities/powers of federal authorities, as well as a new class consciousness absent in US society. And so far, only young people are really enthusiastic/susceptible to those ideas, while the older voters are still very much the ‘I’m alright Jack’ type.
Click to expand...
Besides the far right stuff he wasn't far right.

Trump was seen as a completely unelectable extremist and his party desperately tried to stop him.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Besides the far right stuff he wasn't far right.

Trump was seen as a completely unelectable extremist and his party desperately tried to stop him.
Click to expand...
What his party saw didn’t matter though, what the electorate saw did. Maybe it’s just post-hoc rationalization but Trump won independents by 17 points and they perceived him to be the more moderate candidate.

Much of it depends on how you frame your platform, of course, but it’ll take an unprecedented social media campaign and grassroots outreach to counter the media coverage of Sanders as Democratic nominee. Hell, MSNBC except Chris Hayes is already rooting against him and we’ve barely begun.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
What his party saw didn’t matter though, what the electorate saw did. Maybe it’s just post-hoc rationalization but Trump won independents by 17 points and they perceived him to be the more moderate candidate.

Much of it depends on how you frame your platform, of course, but it’ll take an unprecedented social media campaign and grassroots outreach to counter the media coverage of Sanders as Democratic nominee. Hell, MSNBC except Chris Hayes is already rooting against him and we’ve barely begun.
Click to expand...
Fox News was anti-Trump for a long time.
 
Raoul said:
I think Bernie would do significantly better for a few reasons, which are beginning to take shape.

1. He's a populist, which means he will almost certainly draw more people to show up to vote
2. His ideas are connected to actual problems people in society are facing - namely the costs of healthcare, education, the cost of living, and the widening wealth gap
3. He's viewed as anti-establishment in an era where voters are increasingly frustrated by the establishment
4. He's very hard to attack because he himself doesn't spend much time attacking others beyond simply listing policy differences.
5. Whoever the Dem nominee is, would benefit from the galvanized Dem desire to get rid of Trump

There are a few cons of course - age, who his VP pick may be, etc. But if we were to assume a Bernie, Buttigieg, Biden final three - only Sanders (as of this moment) would be able to animate a large enough turnout to beat Trump and reclaim the Senate imo.
Click to expand...

Sanders' strength and weakness if you want to call it that is his total honesty. His opponents can cherry pick his past positions. But he does not care.
Remember seeing him on Kimmel and he said to Sanders "so you had a stint put in". Bernie corrected him immediately. "Two stints".
In policies and votes he makes mistakes but he owns up.
People love his honesty.

If he was a politician in the normal sense, he would try and pick a moderate as VP. But it is pretty certain he will pick Nina Turner and she will make a great president should Sanders health fail. He only sees the needs of people.

He cannot see past the Humanity of All.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Fox News was anti-Trump for a long time.
Click to expand...
No.

Republican establishments hated him at first, but Fox, especially on their opinion side were on his side from day 1, the lone dissenting voice (Megyn Kelly) were soon silenced following ‘blood coming out of her wherever’.

Trump had a direct line to Roger Ailes. If anything, the rise of Trump had a lot to do with Fox promoting him (and CNN, who saw fit to broadcast his rallies in full)
 
Red Dreams said:
Sanders' strength and weakness if you want to call it that is his total honesty. His opponents can cherry pick his past positions. But he does not care.
Remember seeing him on Kimmel and he said to Sanders "so you had a stint put in". Bernie corrected him immediately. "Two stints".
In policies and votes he makes mistakes but he owns up.
People love his honesty.

If he was a politician in the normal sense, he would try and pick a moderate as VP. But it is pretty certain he will pick Nina Turner and she will make a great president should Sanders health fail. He only sees the needs of people.

He cannot see past the Humanity of All.
Click to expand...

He will be best served to actually do a proper VP search instead of just picking a campaign surrogate with no political experience beyond a stint as an Ohio St. senator, whose current role is basically to give fire and brimstone intro speeches before Sanders arrives.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Fox News was anti-Trump for a long time.
Click to expand...

Trump cultivated personal relationships with all the right people at Fox so that he would be received favorably when he ran. He was good friends with the likes of O'Reilly and Hannity, which allowed him to use Fox's two most watched shows as propaganda platforms to support his candidacy, which when combined with Fox & Friends and his various syccophants at Fox Business (Varney, Dobbs, et al). gave him a strong platform to influence Republican voters in 16. It will no doubt be the same in 20 as well.
 
sun_tzu said:
I think the DNC wants to defeat trump and sees Bernie as a liability in achieving this... From the time I spent in the states and now being quite detached and looking objectively I think they are right to be concerned.

I can see Bernie piling on votes in safe democrat seats and if it were an election based on the popular vote then he would have a good chance

Reality isnt that though... It's an electoral college and the election will be decided in a few key battlegrounds and I don't think Bernie will do well there

I'd love to be wrong because I dread to think how bad trump might get if he does not have to face re-election

I think the democratic party's worst scenario is a brokered convention between independent Bernie Sanders and former republican Bloomberg ... And I wouldn't rule that out
Click to expand...

I think you’re totally wrong actually. Out of all the Democratic candidates Bernie is the one who can win the rust belt states of the working class people screwed by the system which Trump won last time.

Bernie is the democrats only hope to win 2020 electability wise
 
Raoul said:
Trump cultivated personal relationships with all the right people at Fox so that he would be received favorably when he ran. He was good friends with the likes of O'Reilly and Hannity, which allowed him to use Fox's two most watched shows as propaganda platforms to support his candidacy, which when combined with Fox & Friends and his various syccophants at Fox Business (Varney, Dobbs, et al). gave him a strong platform to influence Republican voters in 16. It will no doubt be the same in 20 as well.
Click to expand...

Has not Murdoch gone off Trump?
 
Red Dreams said:
Has not Murdoch gone off Trump?
Click to expand...

Trump still pays the bills at Fox in terms of their viewership, so whoever is running the network (whether Murdoch or his kids), won't be willing to part with that much revenue to suddenly become more neutral.
 
Raoul said:
I think Bernie would do significantly better for a few reasons, which are beginning to take shape.

1. He's a populist, which means he will almost certainly draw more people to show up to vote
2. His ideas are connected to actual problems people in society are facing - namely the costs of healthcare, education, the cost of living, and the widening wealth gap
3. He's viewed as anti-establishment in an era where voters are increasingly frustrated by the establishment
4. He's very hard to attack because he himself doesn't spend much time attacking others beyond simply listing policy differences.
5. Whoever the Dem nominee is, would benefit from the galvanized Dem desire to get rid of Trump

There are a few cons of course - age, who his VP pick may be, etc. But if we were to assume a Bernie, Buttigieg, Biden final three - only Sanders (as of this moment) would be able to animate a large enough turnout to beat Trump and reclaim the Senate imo.
Click to expand...

I read that he isn't 'woke' either unlike some of the other candidates (Warren I think?) so he has more crossover appeal. From my own observations he has that charisma that Corbyn is devoid of, he comes across like a strong leader.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I read that he isn't 'woke' either unlike some of the other candidates (Warren I think?) so he has more crossover appeal. From my own observations he has that charisma that Corbyn is devoid of, he comes across like a strong leader.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Although I don't think Warren has particularly high woke credentials either. That would probably been Harris, who routinely used the term "woke" in her public comments.
 
Seeing stuff from Bernie canvassers on twitter about a Pete surge in NH. Reminder that this is due to wrong results from Iowa that the party is unwilling to correct, which favour Pete and disfavour Bernie. They have literally stolen this election in plain sight.
 
berbatrick said:
Seeing stuff from Bernie canvassers on twitter about a Pete surge in NH. Reminder that this is due to wrong results from Iowa that the party is unwilling to correct, which favour Pete and disfavour Bernie. They have literally stolen this election in plain sight.
Click to expand...

Even if Sanders eeked across the finish line and won Iowa, Pete would've still greatly outperformed expectations there, which would've led to a polling bounce and fundraising gains.
 
Rafaeldagold said:
I think you’re totally wrong actually. Out of all the Democratic candidates Bernie is the one who can win the rust belt states of the working class people screwed by the system which Trump won last time.

Bernie is the democrats only hope to win 2020 electability wise
Click to expand...
Red Dreams said:
Correct.
Click to expand...
Money where mouth is?
 
Raoul said:
Even if Sanders eeked across the finish line and won Iowa, Pete would've still greatly outperformed expectations there, which would've led to a polling bounce and fundraising gains.
Click to expand...

sure, but he's got 3 days of headlines showing him as a winner , when he got less votes and very probably less SDEs and hence is not a winner. this is a different bounce to what he'd get as a "brave 2nd place".
 
berbatrick said:
sure, but he's got 3 days of headlines showing him as a winner , when he got less votes and very probably less SDEs and hence is not a winner. this is a different bounce to what he'd get as a "brave 2nd place".
Click to expand...

I think the narrative coming out of Iowa was less so that Pete won it, and far more so that there was mass chaos and incompetence in the counting process. Also, Biden underperforming was bound to be good for Pete as well.
 
Raoul said:
I think the narrative coming out of Iowa was less so that Pete won it, and far more so that there was mass chaos and incompetence in the counting process. Also, Biden underperforming was bound to be good for Pete as well.
Click to expand...

Very much so... I think Bidens viability would have come under a lot more scrutiny if it hadn't been for the failings in the counting as well

He really needs to limp on then smash South Carolina or he's finished... I could see a few people dropping out before then and if their votes go to Bernie or Pete then it will be hard for him to carry much momentum into the super Tuesday states
 
sun_tzu said:
Very much so... I think Bidens viability would have come under a lot more scrutiny if it hadn't been for the failings in the counting as well

He really needs to limp on then smash South Carolina or he's finished... I could see a few people dropping out before then and if their votes go to Bernie or Pete then it will be hard for him to carry much momentum into the super Tuesday states
Click to expand...

The one thing Biden seems to still have going for him is his lead in southern states. If he can limp out of NH and pick up delegates in NV and SC, then he will have a decent shot of holding serve in the southern states he is up in right now come Super Tuesday and beyond. If he underperforms in SC, then its over imo.
 
sun_tzu said:
[
I'm not short of cash... And with such a superficial shallow and wrong analysis you can't loose right?

How about if Sanders wins the nomination we have $500 on the outcome?
Click to expand...

Thats a bet I would take as I believe if Bernie got the nomination he would defeat Trump.
The challenging part is that he has to beat the DNC first.
 
TBH if you have access to the boneheaded and volatile markets on predictit you can probably make a profitable hedge no matter which side of this bet you take.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.