Who will be the 2020 Democratic nominee?
- Thread starter Jark
- Start date
VoR
Take it or leave it
The momentum seems to be with Buttigieg, and I think the centre will rally around him once it becomes obvious he's the only one who can beat Sanders.
ameraal
la loi de murphy
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2004
- Messages
- 45,061
allegedly the logic behind a bloomberg nomination is to attract moderate republicans to the anyone-but-trump camp.
i just cannot see that working at all. this whole exercise with his run is like a real-life case study of how to buy yourself the presidency of the us.
i just cannot see that working at all. this whole exercise with his run is like a real-life case study of how to buy yourself the presidency of the us.
- Joined
- May 9, 2014
- Messages
- 10,765
British politics has been so distracting I’m shocked that Bloomberg is even a possible favourite to win.
Where did he come from? WHO IS HE!
I thought BIDEN was Bernie’s main rival, but that appears to have been a fever dream.
Where did he come from? WHO IS HE!
I thought BIDEN was Bernie’s main rival, but that appears to have been a fever dream.
Penelope
striking, unique, 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘦𝘳
It'll be Sanders vs Bloomberg and Sanders will win.
Penelope
striking, unique, 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘦𝘳
GinAg (39)
User
- Pronouns
- He/Him
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2009
- Messages
- 229,266
Yup. I don't see them going for Bloomberg regardless of potential.
SDF
We're all Angles in Chainz
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 18,805
Isn’t the issue with Buttigieg that he isn’t popular with African americans? Conversely that’s where Biden should start to re-emerge as a front runner.
Anyway, I hope it’s Sanders, but I really wouldn’t rule out Bloomberg or Biden this early on.
Anyway, I hope it’s Sanders, but I really wouldn’t rule out Bloomberg or Biden this early on.
Jark
User
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2007
- Messages
- 50,913
I think the debate tomorrow night is a big test for Bloomberg. He has a lot to answer for re his comments about minorities (and that's just for starters) - let's see how he handles sustained attacks from the other candidates. If he can brush it off and come through unscathed, he might be the nominee. He's just pouring in too much money NOT to at least be in a two-man race with Bernie, and he has a lot of backing from influential people (even among black communities, stunningly).
Biden is done for at this point @SDF, I think the only question is whether he or Warren drops out first. I can't see them both making it even as far as Super Tuesday next month.
Biden is done for at this point @SDF, I think the only question is whether he or Warren drops out first. I can't see them both making it even as far as Super Tuesday next month.
Are people forgetting that buying yourself into victory is REGULAR now? Bloomberg's method is probably just more obvious.
It should also be noted that voters are taking note of where campaign funds are coming from more than ever. Sanders has really used this to his advantage.
It should also be noted that voters are taking note of where campaign funds are coming from more than ever. Sanders has really used this to his advantage.
If Bloomberg's the nominee then that's it finished, there'll never be a non-billionaire president again. He would genuinely be worse than Trump getting a second term, as far as I'm concerned. He's just as evil as Trump, but more ruthless and competent. He also has no interest in upholding any traditional Democratic values, being a major Republican donor as recently as 2018. We're all completely fucked if he wins.
VoR
Take it or leave it
Well the important thing is nobody’s overreacting 
(Not that I in any way want him, but it’s a long walk to paint him as worse than Trump. If nothing else at least he doesn’t appear to be actively insane)
(Not that I in any way want him, but it’s a long walk to paint him as worse than Trump. If nothing else at least he doesn’t appear to be actively insane)
That's what makes him a much more frightening prospect, to me at least. He'll get his agenda through in a way Trump never could.Well the important thing is nobody’s overreacting
(Not that I in any way want him, but it’s a long walk to paint him as worse than Trump. If nothing else at least he doesn’t appear to be actively insane)
Jark
User
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2007
- Messages
- 50,913
The only positive about Bloomberg is that he's donated heavily to climate change initiatives and would probably reverse Trump's disastrous withdrawal from those agreements. He's also hinted that he's for heavier wealth tax. Everything else is awful - he's still a properly racist misogynist who wants to buy power in his own self-interest.
Penelope
striking, unique, 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘦𝘳
I think Bloomberg's terrible but he isn't quite as poisonous as Trump, who's still got enough competent people around him to get through some utterly poisonous inhumane stuff in DHS et al. And he won't be spending his time pardoning active war criminals to the fury of his own generals!
RaspberrySwirl
Leftover
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2004
- Messages
- 36,605
Now could you imagine if she’d win. There’s something quite endearing about her, yet everytime I watch her it’s like I’m holding my breath and I’m afraid she’s about to embarrass herself like it’s an episode of Veep.
SDF
We're all Angles in Chainz
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 18,805
SDF
We're all Angles in Chainz
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2004
- Messages
- 18,805
Is Warren considered a central politician? I always thought she and Sanders were the progressives in the race. It’s just he has managed to excite the imagination of voters in the left a lot more than she has.
Kala
Call the police
They need to select someone who is going to win over the fringe voters, or those who are Democrats but didn't bother to vote for Clinton for some reason or another. They're never going to be able to win over hardcore Republicans, and the hardcore Democrats will vote regardless.
I don't think Sanders is the one who is going to be able to do that. But then, I am not sure who IS. Sanders has good ideas but I don't think he's got it in him to run a country.
I don't think Sanders is the one who is going to be able to do that. But then, I am not sure who IS. Sanders has good ideas but I don't think he's got it in him to run a country.
ameraal
la loi de murphy
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2004
- Messages
- 45,061
she's a progressive if you look at her voting record and she entered the race with a lot of progressive policies. she's made a bit of a turn towards the center since and is currently attacking the most progressive candidate in the race (sanders) and championing klobuchar (who is as centrist and devoid of any soul as they come) so she's coming across as confused more than anything and i think that's why people have gone so completely off her.
RaspberrySwirl
Leftover
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2004
- Messages
- 36,605
Agree with this, but Sanders might win over some working class people so who knows.
Mugatu
User
Bernie leads Trump by 18 points among independent voters, the most out of anyone in the field. The conventional wisdom doesn’t match the data.
The number of swing voters who are moderates is overestimated. They’re more likely to be people who have been failed by both parties and don’t have a fixed political ideology.
At any rate, I don’t believe that any of the centrist Democratic candidates running this time would inspire as much turnout as Hillary Clinton, and her strategy to replace working-class voters with wealthy moderates was a mistake that cost her the presidency.
What experience of governing do you think Sanders lacks? He’s been in Congress since 1991, and in the Senate for 13 years. Only Biden has been in Washington for longer. His main rivals for the nomination are now two former mayors, neither of which has held a statewide office.
VoR
Take it or leave it
I still fear how easily weaponised the Sanders/Corbyn comparisons are despite their ideological differences, but I think electing a man with sub-zero polling among African Americans and (sad as I am to say) a personal life that will never play well with religious voters is probably even more likely to backfire horribly.
With Biden and Warren seemingly dead in the water, I guess that makes me a #BernieBro for now...
With Biden and Warren seemingly dead in the water, I guess that makes me a #BernieBro for now...
Mugatu
User
The reason there is so much outrage from the left about Bloomberg is down to a few things.
Firstly, it exposes the Democrats as moral hypocrites. Bloomberg has been accused of sexual discrimination and harassment by 64 women (16 more than Trump, if we're counting). His comments about women match Trump’s locker-room talk almost exactly.
He’s equally as explicit as Trump about his belief in the criminality of black people and Latinos, and acted personally on it. A mayor runs a city more closely than a president runs a country. How are people supposed to believe a word the Democrats say about supporting women and minorities when they put someone who’s done these things in the White House?
Secondly, his wealth and power are corrupting forces.
Bloomberg has made donations to all of his high-profile endorsements, from activist groups and within the party. There’s a fairly good chance that endorsing him is the pay-back. This sets an awful precedent for billionaires being able to buy lawmakers’ support out in the open, even in the party that claims to want to take money out of politics.
I can remember the panic about the prospect of a Trump TV channel. Bloomberg has a TV channel and an entire news agency, both restricted in their coverage of him. He has tremendous influence over the media world. A Bloomberg presidency would further weaken the lines between the media, the corporate world and the state. It’s bad for the First Amendment.
Thirdly, I don’t believe that a Bloomberg presidency would offer any material difference for the working class than a Trump presidency. To be honest, you could repeat that for many of the other Democratic contenders, but in Bloomberg’s case, it’s particularly true.
As mayor, Bloomberg was explicit about running New York for the benefit of Wall Street and his support of trickle-down economics (which continues). Inequality in the city grew during his time in office. It was among the worst in America. He stopped checking for lead paint in poor people’s homes. He defunded public housing, even as the economy recovered.
If fixing inequality was his priority as he now says, he would’ve done something about it fairly recently in NYC, where he was mayor during Occupy Wall Street and until as late as December 2013. He said taxing the rich was a bigger problem than income inequality as late as 2018. He’s not credible on the biggest issue.
Firstly, it exposes the Democrats as moral hypocrites. Bloomberg has been accused of sexual discrimination and harassment by 64 women (16 more than Trump, if we're counting). His comments about women match Trump’s locker-room talk almost exactly.
He’s equally as explicit as Trump about his belief in the criminality of black people and Latinos, and acted personally on it. A mayor runs a city more closely than a president runs a country. How are people supposed to believe a word the Democrats say about supporting women and minorities when they put someone who’s done these things in the White House?
Secondly, his wealth and power are corrupting forces.
Bloomberg has made donations to all of his high-profile endorsements, from activist groups and within the party. There’s a fairly good chance that endorsing him is the pay-back. This sets an awful precedent for billionaires being able to buy lawmakers’ support out in the open, even in the party that claims to want to take money out of politics.
I can remember the panic about the prospect of a Trump TV channel. Bloomberg has a TV channel and an entire news agency, both restricted in their coverage of him. He has tremendous influence over the media world. A Bloomberg presidency would further weaken the lines between the media, the corporate world and the state. It’s bad for the First Amendment.
Thirdly, I don’t believe that a Bloomberg presidency would offer any material difference for the working class than a Trump presidency. To be honest, you could repeat that for many of the other Democratic contenders, but in Bloomberg’s case, it’s particularly true.
As mayor, Bloomberg was explicit about running New York for the benefit of Wall Street and his support of trickle-down economics (which continues). Inequality in the city grew during his time in office. It was among the worst in America. He stopped checking for lead paint in poor people’s homes. He defunded public housing, even as the economy recovered.
If fixing inequality was his priority as he now says, he would’ve done something about it fairly recently in NYC, where he was mayor during Occupy Wall Street and until as late as December 2013. He said taxing the rich was a bigger problem than income inequality as late as 2018. He’s not credible on the biggest issue.
Penelope
striking, unique, 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘦𝘳
Mu, have you ever wondered about the utility of writing essays on gay chat forums about the politics of a country you don't live in, to people who don't live there either? 
ameraal
la loi de murphy
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2004
- Messages
- 45,061
Mu, have you ever wondered about the utility of writing essays on gay chat forums about the politics of a country you don't live in, to people who don't live there either?
yes, it's very useful. just don't get derailed by polls and keep the serious discussion to the relevant thread so it's all in one place, mu.
ameraal
la loi de murphy
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2004
- Messages
- 45,061
VoR
Take it or leave it
That's not the point. I don't think the comparison will be in the minds of the average American voter (most of whom, as you say, will never even have heard of him), but I do think that the right wing machine now has essentially has a step-by-step guide to bringing down a divisive leftwing figure.
Which is not to say I don't think Corbyn was 90% the agent of his own destruction, but I don't know that I entirely trust Sanders to play a smarter game.
VoR
Take it or leave it
As an aside: the fact that the Demographic debate has now sunk to the level of two septuagenarians arguing about which one has had fewer heart attacks is so beyond parody I'm genuinely starting to believe the entire US political system is an elaborate media prank.
Jark
User
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2007
- Messages
- 50,913
The comparison between Corbyn and Sanders is really total nonsense and shame on anyone who tries to perpetuate it as evidence that Bernie can't get elected. They are really nothing alike.
For STARTERS politics is now a personality game. As a person Bernie is WIDELY liked by the left (even those not aligned with his progressive policies), whereas a very large chunk of his own party (inside the party and among voters) despised Corbyn. JC's appeal was almost exclusively limited to millennials, which is not the case with Bernie.
Then Corbyn had that antisemitism bollocks hanging over him, which despite a cheap imitation attempt in the US has not plagued Bernie.
Corbyn, despite his claims not to play the game of politics, did exactly that and played badly, taking advice from people who wanted to turn the Labour party into a totalitarian regime in which candidates who spoke out against the leader were deselected, the deputy forced out by the unions etc. The result was chaos. There's no evidence whatsoever that Bernie operates like that - if anything the opposite is true of him, he's too non-political in a way that might be hard to imagine translating into leadership. That's a legitimate question mark hanging over him - how do you turn a grassroots movement into political progress once in office? It's not a problem Corbyn ever had to worry about.
Corbyn was rarely able to deliver speeches with any enthusiasm once the honeymoon was over. He was not a consistently strong orator and rarely challenged a weakened May or a boisterous Boris at PMQs. When he spoke at events during the election he seemed disengaged. That is not an accusation you could ever level at Sanders, whose enthusiasm is always at 110%+.
The idea that Corbyn's failure says anything about Sanders' ability to get elected is a total fallacy.
For STARTERS politics is now a personality game. As a person Bernie is WIDELY liked by the left (even those not aligned with his progressive policies), whereas a very large chunk of his own party (inside the party and among voters) despised Corbyn. JC's appeal was almost exclusively limited to millennials, which is not the case with Bernie.
Then Corbyn had that antisemitism bollocks hanging over him, which despite a cheap imitation attempt in the US has not plagued Bernie.
Corbyn, despite his claims not to play the game of politics, did exactly that and played badly, taking advice from people who wanted to turn the Labour party into a totalitarian regime in which candidates who spoke out against the leader were deselected, the deputy forced out by the unions etc. The result was chaos. There's no evidence whatsoever that Bernie operates like that - if anything the opposite is true of him, he's too non-political in a way that might be hard to imagine translating into leadership. That's a legitimate question mark hanging over him - how do you turn a grassroots movement into political progress once in office? It's not a problem Corbyn ever had to worry about.
Corbyn was rarely able to deliver speeches with any enthusiasm once the honeymoon was over. He was not a consistently strong orator and rarely challenged a weakened May or a boisterous Boris at PMQs. When he spoke at events during the election he seemed disengaged. That is not an accusation you could ever level at Sanders, whose enthusiasm is always at 110%+.
The idea that Corbyn's failure says anything about Sanders' ability to get elected is a total fallacy.
Mugatu
User
Mu, have you ever wondered about the utility of writing essays on gay chat forums about the politics of a country you don't live in, to people who don't live there either?
We all have our interests
If your kind want to spend your Sunday nights calling each other perverts for rating one Latvian Eurovision entry in sixth place instead of seventh, then that's your business.Honestly, I get very bored at work and I like having somewhere to think about this stuff in more detail.
VoR
Take it or leave it
I enjoy them too - when I'm not being accused of being a closet Tory for not drinking the Corbyn/Sanders coolade, anyway. 
cwej
User
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2004
- Messages
- 50,582
