Politics: 2020 Dem POTUS candidate catch all discussion thread

[GrayTide]

Just saw where Bloomberg is going to spend $31 million on campaign ads. The commentator said that based on his net worth of $54 billion, spending $31 million would be like us normal folks spending $157.

 

[Go Bama]

Sanders is a social democrat. Biden, Buttigieg, and Harris are liberal democrats that are either near center to right of center. Warren is the difference split between the two buckets. In terms of larger political ideological commonalities across the West, Sanders is not particularly radical. Effective, high-GDP countries have elected guys as far left as him and not turned to ruin. Truthfully, Sanders overarching goals are not far off from FDR's Second Bill of Rights concepts.

Thank you, but I still don't understand the difference between Warren and Sanders. They both support Medicare for all, free college, reparations for slavery, pro choice, relief of college loans, global warming legislation, etc. Again, correct me where I'm wrong.

Why is Bernie labeled a socialist and Warren is not?

 

[rgw]

Thank you, but I still don't understand the difference between Warren and Sanders. They both support Medicare for all, free college, reparations for slavery, pro choice, relief of college loans, global warming legislation, etc. Again, correct me where I'm wrong.

Why is Bernie labeled a socialist and Warren is not?

Because everyone knows she won't deliver M4A or any of the other headliners. She's even stated she doesn't plan on starting on M4A until year 3. In modern American politics, if you aren't trying to ram every policy point you care about through before the first midterm then you ain't likely to ever do it. She'll say she is for these things but she doesn't have the stomach for the fight. She is more in common with a liberal because she honestly thinks her financial reforms are more important than broad social welfare. Yet she will not get either because you aren't winning the midterms for your party with esoteric finance reforms (at least that is how the average person will see it).

 

[rgw]

Just saw where Bloomberg is going to spend $31 million on campaign ads. The commentator said that based on his net worth of $54 billion, spending $31 million would be like us normal folks spending $157.

Nothing wrong with Regular Country where people can decide to run for president and self-finance it like the rest of us can decide on buying a pair of Apple AirPods.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Thank you, but I still don't understand the difference between Warren and Sanders. They both support Medicare for all, free college, reparations for slavery, pro choice, relief of college loans, global warming legislation, etc. Again, correct me where I'm wrong.

Why is Bernie labeled a socialist and Warren is not?

Probably because Bernie has actually been honest enough to call himself a socialist for 30 years now.

I’m not going to say Warren is a socialist without definition. That’s one of those words so misused it has no meaning anymore. But Bernie himself has used it about himself.

I agree in most points with 92s assessment.

 

[Bamaro]

Just saw where Bloomberg is going to spend $31 million on campaign ads. The commentator said that based on his net worth of $54 billion, spending $31 million would be like us normal folks spending $157.

He'll probably self finance. Trump said he would in 2015 but that was just one of his first of so many lies.

 

[CharminTide]

Just saw where Bloomberg is going to spend $31 million on campaign ads. The commentator said that based on his net worth of $54 billion, spending $31 million would be like us normal folks spending $157.

Ugh.

Bloomberg's entry helps two people. (1) Warren, since she will now have an unpopular billionaire to attack, and (2) Buttigieg, who will no longer be the mayor with the worst record on race.

 

[CharminTide]

Pete continuing to climb in the early states. Biden doing considerably worse in Iowa and NH compared to his national numbers.

 

[Go Bama]

Pete continuing to climb in the early states. Biden doing considerably worse in Iowa and NH compared to his national numbers.

Buttigieg has positioned himself to have more than a casual chance of winning the nomination.

 

[Bamaro]

Buttigieg has positioned himself to have more than a casual chance of winning the nomination.

He's still only doing good in mostly white states. Biden will not win Iowa or NH but will probably easily take SC.

 

[rgw]

I'll reiterate, I think Buttigieg is never going to get the black vote. He's got some stuff under his watch at mayor with the South Bend black community is going to get magnified as his legitimacy as a candidate grows. His campaign's Douglas Plan snafu is already spreading around the internet and is an immensely bad look for him when he is already polling at margin of error with black voters. Doug Jones may be a "milquetoast lib" in my estimation but he is one of the good ones insofar that he passionately went after one of the last church bombers to be prosecuted. His record with the black community in Alabama was sterling and their showing up in 2017 was critical to the narrow win over Roy Moore. I hate to sound like I'm speaking for the black community but I'm just reading the room here. I can see the response to Buttigieg is tepid already. I don't think it is going to get better because he doesn't have the implicit blessing of Obama's VP selection upon him. He's got several things that can be easily deployed against him on this front with just a tad bit of opposition research.

 

[chanson78]

I’d link but for the language. Do the googles for “buttigieg roots article”. A writer took umbrage with something Pete said in 2011. There is some pretty salty language in the original article, but I think what is more interesting is that Pete, a day after the article came out, arranged to talk to the author about his grievances. The author then went on to pen another article I can’t link due to language, but for all that, I’d almost be surprised if the whole scenario doesn’t end up getting Pete more African American support. This is in comparison to what I believe the author was attempting in the original article, which seems to be outrage hype/cancel culture virality mixed with a dash of anti Pete sentiment proof in the black community.

 

[rgw]

I’d link but for the language. Do the googles for “buttigieg roots article”. A writer took umbrage with something Pete said in 2011. There is some pretty salty language in the original article, but I think what is more interesting is that Pete, a day after the article came out, arranged to talk to the author about his grievances. The author then went on to pen another article I can’t link due to language, but for all that, I’d almost be surprised if the whole scenario doesn’t end up getting Pete more African American support. This is in comparison to what I believe the author was attempting in the original article, which seems to be outrage hype/cancel culture virality mixed with a dash of anti Pete sentiment proof in the black community.

I haven't seen this article but I think it is mismeasuring the internet to assume something you see as a "bad faith takedown" actually resulting in something positive for the target. Doesn't typically work like that...the animus seems to stick around even if the progenitor gets debunked. The sociological tendencies of the internet and humanity is weird.

 

[rgw]

I’d link but for the language. Do the googles for “buttigieg roots article”. A writer took umbrage with something Pete said in 2011. There is some pretty salty language in the original article, but I think what is more interesting is that Pete, a day after the article came out, arranged to talk to the author about his grievances. The author then went on to pen another article I can’t link due to language, but for all that, I’d almost be surprised if the whole scenario doesn’t end up getting Pete more African American support. This is in comparison to what I believe the author was attempting in the original article, which seems to be outrage hype/cancel culture virality mixed with a dash of anti Pete sentiment proof in the black community.

I haven't seen this article but I think it is mismeasuring the internet to assume something you see as a "bad faith takedown" actually resulting in something positive for the target. Doesn't typically work like that...the animus seems to stick around even if the progenitor gets debunked. The sociological tendencies of the internet and humanity is weird.

 

[CharminTide]

I haven't seen this article but I think it is mismeasuring the internet to assume something you see as a "bad faith takedown" actually resulting in something positive for the target. Doesn't typically work like that...the animus seems to stick around even if the progenitor gets debunked. The sociological tendencies of the internet and humanity is weird.

I think you're mismeasuring the electorate if you think Twitter outrage is reflective of the real world.

 

[92tide]

I’d link but for the language. Do the googles for “buttigieg roots article”. A writer took umbrage with something Pete said in 2011. There is some pretty salty language in the original article, but I think what is more interesting is that Pete, a day after the article came out, arranged to talk to the author about his grievances. The author then went on to pen another article I can’t link due to language, but for all that, I’d almost be surprised if the whole scenario doesn’t end up getting Pete more African American support. This is in comparison to what I believe the author was attempting in the original article, which seems to be outrage hype/cancel culture virality mixed with a dash of anti Pete sentiment proof in the black community.

i like reading michael harriot (the root author that wrote the piece). i have this article in que to check out later today

 

[CharminTide]

He's still only doing good in mostly white states. Biden will not win Iowa or NH but will probably easily take SC.

Minority outreach is definitely his next challenge. Whether or not he succeeds will determine whether he can win.

 

[rgw]

I think you're mismeasuring the electorate if you think Twitter outrage is reflective of the real world.

The Epstein conspiracy stuff started on the internet and spilled over into the real world rather quick...DNP allege that the Russians "hacked" an election with facebook posts.

Since we're talking about the internet I couldn't help myself:

 

[NationalTitles18]

i like reading michael harriot (the root author that wrote the piece). i have this article in que to check out later today

I checked out BOTH articles. Interesting reading.

 

[CharminTide]

The Epstein conspiracy stuff started on the internet and spilled over into the real world rather quick...DNP allege that the Russians "hacked" an election with facebook posts.

I hear ya, but if I believed that Twitter was reflective of this primary, then Sanders would be winning in a landslide followed by Yang and Tulsi, with Biden and Buttigieg polling at <1%.