Elections 2020 Democratic Primary Thread: The Announcements

[sickc0d3r]

Yeah, I'd say Biden by a lot (I'd still pick the field over him, though) followed by Warren, Bernie, and Harris. But note that I generally see this as unpredictable and we have very little relevant info at this time so that's worth almost nothing.

Yes, it is way to early to call a frontrunner. I'd put Biden top 3, and I have Bernie as the favorite. Warren, Klobu-however-you-spell-it, Biden, Brown (if he runs), Gabbard (if she gets in the debates), and Booker are all going to resonate with voters, I think.
Of course my only problem is Captain Handicapper wants to bet Trump will win as long as he doesn't face one of the probable nominees. What a joke.

 

[waiguoren]

Lame. Sanders has to be top 2 or 3 for getting the nom.

Perhaps he is, but it's not lame. It captures the spirit of the disagreement.

 

[waiguoren]

I think the dismissal of Harris on the basis of her race is just right-wing identity politics. And it's somewhat unfortunate to me, but it looks like Biden will start as the clear frontrunner if he wants it.

I think you're misunderstanding the argument, and I think throwing the "right-wing" qualifier in just muddies the waters. For example, that "left-wing" buddy of mine you were discussing with last time believes that Harris will be the Democratic nominee because (paraphrasing) the Democratic base has become overly fixated on gender/race.

Why do you not prefer Biden?

 

[waiguoren]

Of course my only problem is Captain Handicapper wants to bet Trump will win as long as he doesn't face one of the probable nominees. What a joke.

That's not a fair representation of my position. I think you know that, and I'm certain Jack knows it. He 'likes' posts like this out of tribalism.

Again, my position is that Trump wins if he runs against anyone other than Sanders or Klobuchar. Actually I think he stands a decent chance to beat Sanders. I think Klobuchar would whoop Trump.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think you're misunderstanding the argument, and I think throwing the "right-wing" qualifier in just muddies the waters. For example, that "left-wing" buddy of mine you were discussing with last time believes that Harris will be the Democratic nominee because (paraphrasing) the Democratic base has become overly fixated on gender/race.

Why do you not prefer Biden?

He's too old, I don't think he's very impressive intellectually, he's said and done a lot to cause me to question his commitment to rational governance. I would certainly take him over Trump, but he's not high on my list of favored nominees.

I think Harris is impressive in some ways, but her résumé is too thin, and a couple of bills she's introduced seem badly designed to me. But that said, I don't see any reason to totally dismiss her just because she's part black, which is what it seems to me is happening in some circles.

 

[waiguoren]

I don't see any reason to totally dismiss [Harris] just because she's part black, which is what it seems to me is happening in some circles.

Source?

 

[Jack V Savage]

That's not a fair representation of my position. I think you know that, and I'm certain Jack knows it. He 'likes' posts like this out of tribalism.

Again, my position is that Trump wins if he runs against anyone other than Sanders or Klobuchar. Actually I think he stands a decent chance to beat Sanders. I think Klobuchar would whoop Trump.

I "liked" it partly to say I read it and appreciated it but I have no response, partly because I agree with some of it, and partly because I think "Captain Handicapper" is a pretty cute nickname. Nothing to do with tribalism.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Source?

This thread, for one. But just generally, the attitude I see, "if Harris wins, it's only because of identity politics," even though her identity is likely still a handicap in terms of elections. It rules out the possibility that she could win just like any other candidate, and I see no good reason for that.

 

[sickc0d3r]

That's not a fair representation of my position. I think you know that, and I'm certain Jack knows it. He 'likes' posts like this out of tribalism.

Again, my position is that Trump wins if he runs against anyone other than Sanders or Klobuchar. Actually I think he stands a decent chance to beat Sanders. I think Klobuchar would whoop Trump.

Ummm...

I think stating it's an absolute fact that any candidate, let alone one as incompetent, unskilled, and unliked as Trump, beats a competent challenger is stupid.

Maybe. Want to bet on it?

Sounds like you think he'll beat any "competent challenger", how did I misrepresent your position? Are Klobuchar and Sanders not competent?

I'm betting if he's on the ballot in 2020 he loses, no matter who the challenger.

 

[waiguoren]

This thread, for one.

Quote a post from this thread of someone saying that Harris is not a good choice for president because she is part black.

But just generally, the attitude I see, "if Harris wins, it's only because of identity politics," even though her identity is likely still a handicap in terms of elections.

You missed the point. The argument of many (including that friend of mine) is that being non-white and/or female confers advantages in the Democratic primary. I haven't seen anyone argue that these are big advantages in the general election.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Quote a post from this thread of someone saying that Harris is not a good choice for president because she is part black.

Meh, I think you're playing dumb. Your friend's quote sounds like the same thing. Ruling out the possibility that she could possibly win for any other reason. No one says, "if Biden wins, it proves that white identity politics still rules the Democratic Party," for example.

You missed the point. The argument of many (including that friend of mine) is that being non-white and/or female confers advantages in the Democratic primary. I haven't seen anyone argue that these are big advantages in the general election.

And where's the evidence for that claim?

 

[waiguoren]

Sounds like you think he'll beat any "competent challenger", how did I misrepresent your position?

Read the entire exchange and I think you'll realize your error.

I'm betting if he's on the ballot in 2020 he loses, no matter who the challenger.

The way I wrote it up, no one loses/wins if Sanders or Klobuchar is the nominee. I think the field is more likely than Sanders/Klobuchar, and I expect Trump to make it to election day, so I think we're likely to have action.

 

[waiguoren]

Meh, I think you're playing dumb.

Dodge noted.

No one says, "if Biden wins, it proves that white identity politics still rules the Democratic Party," for example.

That's not isomorphic. The claim does not take the form of "If A wins, then it proves B."

The complete claim, as I understand it, is: in 2020, being a non-white female will confer large advantages in the Democratic primary such that a not-completely-incompetent person with basic public service credentials fitting that profile is highly likely to win the Democratic nomination.

You missed the point. The argument of many (including that friend of mine) is that being non-white and/or female confers advantages in the Democratic primary. I haven't seen anyone argue that these are big advantages in the general election.

And where's the evidence for that claim?

It's not my claim. I already noted in this thread that I'm agnostic on the question. If you want me to ask my friend for you, I will. I've seen people in the War Room claim the same, though I don't remember which posters.


----

That's enough for now. The woman asks, "what are you doing?". I reply, "typing to Jack V Savage". She responds, "*GROAN*. Who cares about him?"

Don't misunderstand though. I care about you, bro.

 

[sickc0d3r]

Read the entire exchange and I think you'll realize your error.

I'd rather you just tell me, thanks.

The way I wrote it up, no one loses/wins if Sanders or Klobuchar is the nominee. I think the field is more likely than Sanders/Klobuchar, and I expect Trump to make it to election day, so I think we're likely to have action.

Yeah, Trump's chance's increase the more legitimate opposition you eliminate. That's not a very interesting bet to me, I'll pass.

 

[Trotsky]

Yeah, I'd say Biden by a lot (I'd still pick the field over him, though) followed by Warren, Bernie, and Harris. But note that I generally see this as unpredictable and we have very little relevant info at this time so that's worth almost nothing.

Thinking that Warren is more likely than Sanders is pretty baffling to me.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Thinking that Warren is more likely than Sanders is pretty baffling to me.

We shall see.

 

[glenwo2]

That's not a fair representation of my position. I think you know that, and I'm certain Jack knows it. He 'likes' posts like this out of tribalism.

Again, my position is that Trump wins if he runs against anyone other than Sanders or Klobuchar. Actually I think he stands a decent chance to beat Sanders. I think Klobuchar would whoop Trump.

I'm not too familiar with where Klobuchar stands as far as Policies and Ideologies.

Can you further elaborate how she would "whoop" Trump?

 

[xcvbn]

Quote a post from this thread of someone saying that Harris is not a good choice for president because she is part black.

How can a black woman born and raised in Oakland be so terrible on criminal justice, especially the cases where she locked away PoC for decades on technicalities.

She is an awful choice for president.

 

[glenwo2]

How can a black woman born and raised in Oakland be so terrible on criminal justice, especially the cases where she locked away PoC for decades on technicalities.

She is an awful choice for president.

Would you be surprised if the Democrats nominated her, though?

It's been their M.O. to focus on Race and Gender more than anything else so her nomination would be Expected.

Besides, I think they want to put a Woman in the WhiteHouse and they felt they were "robbed" of that opportunity by Trump so they're trying to have a re-do of 2016 but with Harris playing the part of Hillary.

 

[xcvbn]

I'm not too familiar with where Klobuchar stands as far as Policies and Ideologies.

Can you further elaborate how she would "whoop" Trump?

She's against Medicare for All, something 85% of Dems and 70% of Americans want.

She will get obliterated in the primary alone if she sticks to her guns on that.