-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Democratic Presidential Primary |February OT| It Can't be Worse than Iowa, Right? (Discussion Guidelines in OP)
- Thread starter Poodlestrike
- Start date
- Status
That's his donation pattern over the last 12 years. Do you have any reason to believe he's going to change that now?
Why wouldn't he block it? Because he's vain and he cares more about image than any particular policy. Being seen as blocking the larger party when the reason he won would likely be because people who voted him in by and large had no idea about the details of his record and thought he was just a generic democrat with a generic platform. So, if the dems can deliver something to him, he'd pass it. Otherwise he'd have nothing to pass. And if he has nothing to pass, it'd hurt his image.
I don't have data points but I'd imagine turnout for uncontested primaries will always be lower for that party. What should be concerning for democrats is how much higher the turnout was for Trump's uncontested primary compared to past ones. Will be interesting to see how it is in the upcoming primaries to see if it's a random outlier or not
Yeah taking out Brexit is a take that makes no sense. It was by far the biggest issue in the election for older people especially.
The literal only reason Bloomberg would make it out of the primary is if black people vote for him.
It's very possible bernie's popularity drops enough to lose him the election once the spotlight is on him. He won't lose in a landslide but trump might win some more states in the Mid-West. If he choses a decent VP he might nullify all of what I said and crush trump.
what do you mean "Remember" CNN just pulled that shit again last night when Bernie won.
Quite frankly I don't trust a single word out of his mouth and the fact that you are still doing everything to defend the man is disgusting.
This is the case for any candidate. It's not something unique to Bernie but you're presenting it as if it is.
If bloomberg gets the nom having a Trump with a D next to his name isn't going to be any better (and others have pointed out he likely could be even worse given he has more money, knows what hes doing in politics, and hasn't lost his mind). You want to talk about feeling morally superior while putting up defenses for scenarios where we would put up a racist, transphobic, pro corporate republican on the Dem ticket is doing exactly what I would call trying to feel morally superior.
he's been called that by the murdoch-owned press for more than a decade, corbyn's policies and the popularity thereof were still enough for labour to prevent the conservatives from a majority government in 2017
what changed since then was brexit
YUP, it's incredible to watch unfold.
AND THERE IT IS, FOLKS. The media doesn't want to talk about Bernie. It's all about their centrist darlings, Mayor Pete and Klobuchar. It's funny but it's also really fucking annoying lol
Bloomberg is so dangerous that it honestly makes more sense to sit it out and hope Trump wins. Trump is much more unstable and hated, therefore leading to a much more fired up 2024 and 2022 than we would see under Bloomberg. And I only say this because I have zero confidence in Bloomberg actually adopting D positions once he's in office.
User Banned (1 Week): Ignoring Staff Post with Regards to Hostility
"Doing everything".
Quite the rational conversation. Okay, carry on.
It's possible to the point I won't discount it, but I don't think it's very likely. Back in 2016, I distinctly remember seeing certain conservatives say they hated Trump and hated Hillary, but while they disagreed with Bernie's politics they thought he was a decent guy. Anecdote, but it's something.
How is a liberal SCJ worse? How is someone who acknowledges climate change worse? This is insane. He's terrible I agree, but he's better than the guy who believes that climate change is a chinese hoax.
Why are you making this excuse? Did you know that one of the reasons, among many, Trump got elected is because black people didn't turn out in the numbers to vote for Hillary like they did for Obama? Does that somehow justify Trump being elected because they didn't want to vote for someone who called black people super predators and had slaves? No it doesn't, not at all. Yes, SOME black people would have had to vote for Bloomberg if he got the nomination. That doesn't mean it would be okay to elect a racist who destroyed black communities using what he described as his own private army. You're acting like just because he gets 30% of the black vote then Bloomberg gets a pass, you know some black people voted for Trump also, it doesn't give him a pass.
Then what are you doing since every post after the past few pages has been nothing but making excuses for Bloomberg's history?
sometimes it's not worth comprising your morals to vote for a racist republican shitbag just to hope said billionaire shitbag actually follows through with his word
It's very possible trump's huge flaws overlap bernie's flaws in the end and bernie beats him by like 5 or more percent. It all depends on his VP choice at this point. A unity ticket will easily beat trump.
Reuters literally has double digit tweets declaring bernie the winner. They actually dissected all the candidates and seemingly tweeted about them. I wouldnt look for that here, posting that tweet alone is a bit out of context.
Candidates from midwest swing states
Biden
Steyer
Bloomberg
*Klobuchar*
If you guys are so scared of losing our votes if Bloomberg is the nom, you should make it your mission from God to make sure he isn't the nom. There's no point in trying to corner people into voting D in a scenario that hasn't even played out yet.
I heard a TON of this about hillary as well. Hillary was close friends with kissinger, she herself had issues with race (modern day slave labor with the prisoners working for her for free, super predator comments) was anti gay marriage up until not too long ago, was "in wall streets pocket" close friends with donald trump. People said the same things about hillary. Look I"m not saying bloomberg is nearly as good as hillary, but I'm saying he still would have a D next to his name, he still would appoint a democrat to the supreme court which has MASSIVE long term ramifications. He would help the down ticket, and if the economy continues to do well at least it won't be perceived as republican policy that's pushing that along.
On top of all of that, they both could be evil people, but if one of those people sees the massive crisis to our way of life in climate change, and the other is a conspiracy theorist rolling coal type, I'm choosing the person who at least can see what's in front of them everytime.
I think people need to take a deep breath and calm down to be frank. Of course the media is talking about Pete and Amy. Both of them significantly exceeded expectations. Bernie underperformed significantly - NH should never have been this close by any means.
The media are talking about the actual news story that's interesting. Bernie winning NH has been on the cards since the day he won it in 2016. The only story concerning Bernie here is the fact he only just won it in votes and drew with Pete on delegates.
You do not know the types of judges he is going to pick. Bloomberg is a republican. At best youll get a moderate judge. AT BEST.
Not to mention his climate position is literally the worst ranked plan of any of the dems, doesn't align with plans that would save the world, and thus would make SCOTUS pointless given were all going to die thanks to him not doing enough to stop it anyway.
But not that this matters because even if he gets the nom, hes going to be absolutely destroyed by Trump in the GE because moderate dems (here hes a republican) have done nothing but lose every bid for the WH since Clinton, unless youre Obama who had to run on a populist message that belied how progressive he was actually going to be.
Yeah this is total magical thinking with no basis in reality, there is absolutely no reason to believe Bloomberg would appoint meaningfully left-wing judges whatsoever. At best you get more Kennedys. Not to mention, "believing climate change is real" is not sufficient when the science tells us the only way to combat climate change in a way that actually stops most of the damage we will sustain, is through massive restructuring of our society and our economy, much of which necessitates taking on industry - something the fucking billionaire isn't going to do. It's not a meaningful difference to just say you believe it's real and we have to do something about it, but not do enough to change anything than if we did nothing anyway.
It is meaningful because trump shouting to the american people that it's a hoax, a liberal agenda conspiracy that we should continue to push coal to stomp out those liberal snowflakes, is far more damaging. Any improvement, however minor, is worth fighting for. I would be extremely disappointed if it goes bloomberg v trump (it won't), but I still would vote for the guy who at least knows what a hyphen is.
I'm always saying that to beat someone who was on the Lolita Express the Dems need to nominate someone who was also on the Lolita Express.
Never mind that Bloomberg is a scumbag, he'd also absolutely lose to Trump. You'd be laying up the GOP's plan to depress the vote by having two billionaire racist pieces of shit as your choices.
Should also be a lesson to people in here that jumping on the first tweet to doubt the level of turnout just to spin up your "Bernie won't get out the vote" narrative just makes you look silly.
LMAO, the apple news alert I got this morning also failed to mention Bernie. Said something about Klob surging and Yang dropping out. Shit is transparent af.
It really is.
Should also be a lesson to people in here that jumping on the first tweet to doubt the level of turnout just to spin up your "Bernie won't get out the vote" narrative just makes you look silly.
LMAO, the apple news alert I got this morning also failed to mention Bernie. Said something about Klob surging and Yang dropping out. Shit is transparent af.
He's donated a lot of money to Democratic campaigns. It helped flip the House in 2018, that's a fact. He has donated a lot of money over the last decade to Democratic candidates. That is also a fact.
If someone tries to argue that he wouldn't legislate like a Democrat because he's donated to Republicans, that's logically inconsistent. It doesn't make any sense if you look at the amount of money he's given to Democratic candidates. He has vowed to use the infrastructure he has built this cycle to help any Democratic nominee in this cycle as well... Now, that remains to be seen but he does have a history of aiding Democratic candidates so it wouldn't be much of a stretch.
So, help me understand: Why would he try so hard to flip the House and aid Democrats in winning elections? Is it because he wanted to take the reins and run against Trump in 2020? Is it because he feels he could better influence policy with the Democratic donations he did previously make, and is currently making?
Clearly, he is trans-phobic and racist. Apparently, also a sexual predator. He should not be the Democratic nominee. I am not defending, nor making excuses for his past behavior. I will not be voting for him in the primary.
Yeah. The primary isn't over and Bloomberg has notably not been the frontrunner. I don't think there's value in catastrophizing the day that Bloomberg gets the nomination any more than there was with Biden, given that neither of them are going anywhere vote-wise. Most people realize that Bloomberg is garbage, I think, though I do think we can keep that momentum going by reminding people of stop and frisk and, really, just how the NYPD has been in general. And his wealth.
I'm more worried about Pete because apparently people see some sort of value in his candidacy despite being the most vapid empty-suit salesman of a politician I've seen in my life. Some weird Stepford candidate or one of those goofy "president" characters you see on more electorally-focused prestige dramas.
OP
OP
Bloomberg was a Republican for most of his tenure as Mayor and was pulling Republicans across the finish line as recently as 2016. I'm not gonna comment on what to do if he's the nom, but we should really make an effort to make sure he doesn't get it.
I'm phone banking on Thursday. What's other peoples' volunteering plans?
I'm phone banking on Thursday. What's other peoples' volunteering plans?
I'm in the camp that doesn't see any good options among the current top three. I think Bernie's socialism and naked calls for a revolution will sink him with the over 45 crowd, and I see a thin electoral college path for him. If he squeaks by I can see the 2022 midterms being a brutal bloodbath worse than 2010. Buttigieg comes across as way too much of a wooden egghead and a cerebral thinker, he lacks that cultural and guttural connection the working class saw in Biden. He's easily dismissed as a naive lightweight due to his thin resume and age. His being gay has a fair chance of being a significant liability, unfortunately. Bloomberg has amazing strength to people who admire successful businessmen for their perceived competence and non-ideological outlook, but his nanny state reputation, stance on guns, and New York pedigree will put a firm ceiling on his appeal to more cultural voters. He won't excite young voters and minorities.
Maybe Klobuchar or Biden have the fewest outright weaknesses and could stitch together the broadest coalition, but their paths to the nomination are very narrow at the moment.
Maybe Klobuchar or Biden have the fewest outright weaknesses and could stitch together the broadest coalition, but their paths to the nomination are very narrow at the moment.
Psst. Got something I wanna tell you:
Trump donated to Democrats as well up until his presidential bid. In his case, it was less rather than more starting in 2011, but it's still the truth. It's almost like none of these slimy rich assholes are trustworthy in the slightest. If you claim to be a progressive and anti-Trump, why are you defending someone who literally hung out with Trump once upon a time, and RECENTLY donated money to the Republican party under Trump's leadership?
Also:
I'm gonna text bank leading up to Super Tuesday as a Virginian and donate a bit more. My anxiety makes anything else kinda scary for me, lol.
I'm genuinely shocked and disappointed how much protest vote I'm seeing talked about on here. Again that's our right as american people, I understand why it's frustrating, I just really am shocked that resetera of all places would abstain from any election involving trump.
you can't compare Corbyn to Sanders
Corbyn was anti-EEC and anti-EU since the 1970s and was a bullshit artist during the Brexit Referendum
Corbyn was the WORST Labour leader for the UK to have during Buring, during Breixt negotations, during May election, during Johnson election
- Status