Elections 2020 Democratic Primary Thread v4

[method115]

Ehhh, we'll see. I wouldn't rule it out. If it comes down to Biden and Bernie, I wouldn't count out an endorsement. The VP pick is a bit of a stretch, but you never know. Politics be crazy these days, and it would honestly be a great move.

As far as using Obama's name to get him more support, I don't think it's desperate. It's expected. Shit, who wouldn't do it in Joe's position? It would be dumb not to take advantage of the affiliation.

I'm not saying using the names is desperate. What's desperate is the statement of having her as his VP. It's expected that he would use Obama's name as much as he could. Didn't think he would reach as far as claiming he's considering them for VP\Judge but whatever.

 

[Trotsky]

I'm not saying using the names is desperate. What's desperate is the statement of having her as his VP. It's expected that he would use Obama's name as much as he could. Didn't think he would reach as far as claiming he's considering them for VP\Judge but whatever.

When Fernando Haddad ran against Bolsonaro in 2018, everyone knew he was going to try to bring up Lula as much as humanly possible and he had a famous ad where "Haddad" and "Lula" were interchanged and superimposed to create the impression that they're the same person. Pretty funny. I expect that will be where Biden ends. Maybe do a face morph thing.

 

[Phisher]

Biden is a pretty worthless candidate, but he's right on this issue. Sanders should be embarrassed by the underhandedness and, maybe most importantly, the sloppiness given Joe's many, many actual flaws that can be accurately criticized.

Biden has, in fact, spent decades advocating reaching across the aisle to work on entitlement cuts, and the Obama administration nearly finalized a deal with the Republican House leadership to cut Social Security until the Freedom Caucus scuttled it because they didn't want to comprise with Obama on anything.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-obamas-social-security-cuts-republicans-did/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrew...hrows-in-the-towel-on-social-security-reform/

The Obama administration was actually proposing bigger cuts than Paul Ryan was at the time.

https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...nd-medicare-by-much-more-than-the-gop/274919/

The only real criticism against Sanders' campaign is that they should have used a video with better context.




The fact that these establishment shills and "fact checkers" ignored Biden and Obama's history RE entitlement reform when discussing the "context" of that video is what's embarrassing.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

 

[kpt018]

Biden has, in fact, spent decades advocating reaching across the aisle to work on entitlement cuts, and the Obama administration nearly finalized a deal with the Republican House leadership to cut Social Security until the Freedom Caucus scuttled it because they didn't want to comprise with Obama on anything.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-obamas-social-security-cuts-republicans-did/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrew...hrows-in-the-towel-on-social-security-reform/

The Obama administration was actually proposing bigger cuts than Paul Ryan was at the time.

https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...nd-medicare-by-much-more-than-the-gop/274919/

The only real criticism against Sanders' campaign is that they should have used a video with better context.




The fact that these establishment shills and "fact checkers" ignored Biden and Obama's history RE entitlement reform when discussing the "context" of that video is what's embarrassing.

Paul Ryan proposed privatizing SS. He fantasized about it and said something to the effect that privatizing it would be the greatest accomplishment of his life. That’s a big difference compared to cuts to help sustain the program.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. This issue is fair game and Sanders should blast him for it if he so desires. But using a fake video is fucking slimy. It's also worth noting that Biden's position now is to preserve entitlements, so it isn't a political winner (unless you doctor a video in order to create the appearance he said something he didn't).

 

[kpt018]

Here's a source that should put to bed the idea that O and Biden were even remotely comparable to Ryan and the right on SS/Medicare:

https://www.cbpp.org/tags/ryan-budget

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Biden is a pretty worthless candidate, but he's right on this issue. Sanders should be embarrassed by the underhandedness and, maybe most importantly, the sloppiness given Joe's many, many actual flaws that can be accurately criticized.

Just in case my sarcasm meter failed me:
JOE BIDEN LIED ABOUT HIS RECORD ON SOCIAL SECURITY
https://theintercept.com/2020/01/25/joe-biden-social-security/

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think this is a pretty good sign for Sanders and Dems

Nichols is one of the more prominent Never Trumpers and he's already promising and encouraging people to vote for Sanders is he ends up being the nominee and he despises Sanders.

All reasonable, well-informed people would enthusiastically support Sanders over Trump, but that's not a big enough bloc to make me feel safe.

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

All reasonable, well-informed people would enthusiastically support Sanders over Trump, but that's not a big enough bloc to make me feel safe.

I'm just contrasting it to 2016 when the Never Trump crowd was more on the voting 3rd party or abstaining from voting train.

I think now they will be openly endorsing whoever the Dem nominee is

And when you consider the last election was decided by 50k votes that could be a difference maker

 

[Sano]

I’m not validating the polls but that’s easily explainable. There are a ton of right of center voters that hate Trump and prefer Biden to Bernie. And those voters are not reflected in primary polling. Also, most voters don’t participate in primaries.

Still doesn't quite make sense. I'd like to see the electorate as well, besides the rest of the methodology and date of the polls (if they were pre recent Sanders rise).

Bernie is currently leading by 10% points in the aggregate in New Hampshire against Biden. Most of these polls use likely democratic voters, but some include independents where Bernie does even better. You would assume, that at least these would pick Bernie over Biden against Trump. The state has roughly 270.000 registered democrats, 280.000 registered republicans and 410.000 independents (1).

According to the new CNN New Hampshire poll, 90% of republicans has a favorable view on Trump, which is the same in most polls (2). Assuming that these will vote for Trump, that will leave 10% who would be left to favor Bernie or Biden over Trump, of the republican voters.

If Bernie is leading with 10% on average, and that might still leave some independents, considering that the democrat and republican registered voters are pretty much equally split, that would mean that all the republicans not voting for Trump would need to vote for Biden over Bernie in a Trump matchup, and it still wouldn't put Biden ahead.

I know there's a lot of factors here and this is a very simplified analysis, but it just strikes me as odd that a state where Bernie is leading by two digits, that has 50% independents voters, and with republicans pretty much guaranteed to vote for Trump, that Biden would poll higher than Bernie against Trump. Do you see where I'm coming from?

 

[kpt018]

Still doesn't quite make sense. I'd like to see the electorate as well.

Bernie is currently leading by 10% points in the aggregate in New Hampshire against Biden. Most of these polls use likely democratic voters, but some include independents where Bernie does even better. You would assume, that these voters would pick Bernie over Biden against Trump. The state has roughly 270.000 registered democrats, 280.000 registered republicans and 410.000 independents (1).

According to the new CNN New Hampshire poll , 90% of republicans has a favorable view on Trump, which is the same in most polls (2). Assuming that these will vote for Trump, that will leave 10% who would favor Bernie or Biden over Trump of republican voters.

If Bernie is leading with 10% on average, and that might still leave some independents, considering that the democrat and republican registered voters are pretty much equally split, that would mean that all the republicans not voting for Trump would need to vote for Biden over Bernie in a Trump matchup, and it still wouldn't put Biden ahead.

I know there's a lot of factors here and this is a very simplified analysis, but it just strikes me as odd that a state where Bernie is leading by two digits, that has 50% independents voters, and with republicans pretty much guaranteed to vote for Trump, that Biden would poll higher than Bernie against Trump. Do you see where I'm coming from?

Sure, I see what you’re saying. And the polling may or may not be accurate. I can see scenarios that explain why it is accurate.

Anyway, just about everyone credible is seeing a Sanders surge and this race is really interesting.

 

[Sano]

Sure, I see what you’re saying. And the polling may or may not be accurate. I can see scenarios that explain why it is accurate.

Anyway, just about everyone credible is seeing a Sanders surge and this race is really interesting.

Definitely, it's very interesting! Very exciting too! Nothing is quite like American elections.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I'm just contrasting it to 2016 when the Never Trump crowd was more on the voting 3rd party or abstaining from voting train.

I think now they will be openly endorsing whoever the Dem nominee is

And when you consider the last election was decided by 50k votes that could be a difference maker

I don't think Sanders will do anywhere near as well with the 100k+ demographic as Hillary did; which makes up a pretty large voting block

 

[LuchaBear]

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

I don't think Sanders will do anywhere near as well with the 100k+ demographic as Hillary did; which makes up a pretty large voting block

Is it that big of a block in PA, WI, OH and MI?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Is it that big of a block in PA, WI, OH and MI?

Don't know, do you have exit polls for those states?

 

[Phisher]

Paul Ryan proposed privatizing SS. He fantasized about it and said something to the effect that privatizing it would be the greatest accomplishment of his life. That’s a big difference compared to cuts to help sustain the program.

In lieu of privatization, which Ryan knew wasn't going to happen with a Democratic POTUS, he and the GOP proposed cuts to social security. Those cuts were smaller than the ones that Obama ended up negotiating with House leadership as is detailed in the articles that I posted.

I said this before and I’ll say it again. This issue is fair game and Sanders should blast him for it if he so desires. But using a fake video is fucking slimy. [

That video wasn't fake. It was clipped out of context from a longer speech. I do agree that they should have used one that was more suited to the topic though.

Biden is on the record talking about entitlement cuts over and over again throughout his career, and he just lies about it when challenged. The fact that all of these pundits and "fact checkers" covered his ass is ridiculous.

Look at this:



Here he is proposing a freeze on the floor of the Senate in the 90s.

It's also worth noting that Biden's position now is to preserve entitlements, so it isn't a political winner (unless you doctor a video in order to create the appearance he said something he didn't).

Biden adopted all of his current positions in the past 12 months in response to criticism about his record. It took like three months of criticism early in the campaign for him to shut up about how great the Crime Bill was and to start talking about criminal justice reform. The guy is full of shit.

 

[LuchaBear]

 

[kpt018]

In lieu of privatization, which Ryan knew wasn't going to happen with a Democratic POTUS, he and the GOP proposed cuts to social security. Those cuts were smaller than the ones that Obama ended up negotiating with House leadership as is detailed in the articles that I posted.






That video wasn't fake. It was clipped out of context from a longer speech. I do agree that they should have used one that was more suited to the topic though.

Biden is on the record talking about entitlement cuts over and over again throughout his career, and he just lies about it when challenged. The fact that all of these pundits and "fact checkers" covered his ass is ridiculous.

Look at this:



Here he is proposing a freeze on the floor of the Senate in the 90s.









Biden adopted all of his current positions in the past 12 months in response to criticism about his record. It took like three months of criticism early in the campaign for him to shut up about how great the Crime Bill was and to start talking about criminal justice reform. The guy is full of shit.

As I've said to other posters making these same claims - YES! Attack Biden for his history.

But the issue here is the video. They cut out the part that makes it clear Joe is mocking Ryan for his position so that viewer leaves with the impression Joe supports Ryan and that is completely fucking slimy. If the Joe's record is as clear as you say there's no need to do that.

Politics is a dirty, ugly game but I'd like to see Bernie keep it clean. That's all.

And one last comment, Joe's current position is what's most important.

 

[tatanos]