US PoliEra 2020 |OT 3| "I think he's learned his lesson" says The Concerned Immoderate Darling Collins.

Beer Monkey · Feb 25, 2020

Greigor the FellHand said:
So "moderate Democrats" are worried about Bernie being the front runner.

"Moderate Dems" just like "moderate darlings" are moderate. Hope we vote em out

It's a strawman. It's really more republicans that pretend to be dems that are worried. I'm sending money to Liz but I'm not going to sit around hand wringing about Bernie.

But the bottom line is the *real* moderate dems are the ones who vote way more than some edgy contrarian leftists who decide to get involved every four years, so they're at least doing something.

FWIW I'm also WAY to the left of the center of the DNC. It's a shame more people don't vote in all elections and all primaries, we could move the party substantially left.

Tamanon · Feb 25, 2020

Yes. Vote out all the moderates! The progressive agenda will win all the seats instead!

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

Greigor the FellHand said:
I haven't missed the point. I just didn't write it out well. All "moderate darlings" are just shirtbags that need to be voted out

You lumped actual moderate dems (many of whom just flipped us the House in 2018) "moderate darlings" and said they should be voted out. Far-left candidates aren't going to be competitive in most/all of those seats!

Blader · Feb 25, 2020

Beer Monkey said:
It's a strawman. It's really more republicans that pretend to be dems that are worried.

I don't think that's true or fair. The House was flipped off the backs of a lot of moderate Dem wins, who are worried. Being moderate and being concerned about Bernie as the nominee doesn't make them Republicans, and taking a "fuck em let's get rid of them" mentality to those people, at least in the short term, just means losing the House.

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

Blader said:
I don't think that's true or fair. The House was flipped off the backs of a lot of moderate Dem wins, who are worried. Being moderate and being concerned about Bernie as the nominee doesn't make them Republicans, and taking a "fuck em let's get rid of them" mentality to those people, at least in the short term, just means losing the House.

It's amazing how people can look at Corbyn's absolutely disastrous reign as Labour Leader in the UK and go "I want that!" (not a direct Sanders comparison, this is about the mentality)

Linkura · Feb 25, 2020

Kirblar said:
Biden's inner circle was leaking damaging stories.

It was, and Vox literally just put out a piece on it today as well going into why the 1:1 comparisons don't work. (while somehow missing that the guy screwed up the chart's healthcare costs) https://www.vox.com/2020/2/25/21151335/oren-cass-cost-of-thriving

This is based on bad math that ignores employer-side health care payments. (copying post from the weekend into this one below)

There was a chart going around on twitter about College/HC/Transportation/Housing inflation that.... is actually wrong. The issue is that if you treat insurance premiums as expenses, you need to add employer-side Insurance payments as income! And, as it turns out, that significantly changes the chart. Now, the corrected data does show disposable income going from 40% to 25% here. That is important. But it doesn't show those other 4 crowding that out completely.

You have completely missed the point of why "moderate darlings" is in quotes. spoiler: it's because they're not moderate and are roleplaying as an actual moderate.

Sue Collins is a "moderate darling" because she's a straight up partisan R who takes costless votes when she can to make her appear "bipartisan."

Thanks Kirb.

Wapo doing exceptional research before posting as usual.

AnotherNils · Feb 25, 2020

Greigor the FellHand said:
I haven't missed the point. I just didn't write it out well. All "moderate darlings" are just shirtbags that need to be voted out

This is tea party of the left bullshit.

Deleted member 48897 · Feb 25, 2020

Blader said:
I don't think that's true or fair. The House was flipped off the backs of a lot of moderate Dem wins, who are worried. Being moderate and being concerned about Bernie as the nominee doesn't make them Republicans, and taking a "fuck em let's get rid of them" mentality to those people, at least in the short term, just means losing the House.

I don't understand why they're worried that someone whose polling has been consistently high in just about every state is going to win the nomination. Seems like the sort of thing that's great for general turnout to me

AnotherNils said:
This is tea party of the left bullshit.

Considering how effective the tea party was at normalizing their ideas and reaching their goals in congress I'm going to take this as a high compliment, especially because it's not happening with the aid of massive astroturf finance campaigning

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

muteKi said:
Considering how effective the tea party was at normalizing their ideas and reaching their goals in congress I'm going to take this as a high compliment, especially because it's not happening with the aid of massive astroturf finance campaigning

You shouldn't. The Tea Party actively hindered the GOP in 2010->2014, losing them many winnable seats and accidentally helped Dems lessen their marginal losses. Actively purging your moderates is a self-destructive, nihilistic political strategy.

Blader · Feb 25, 2020

muteKi said:
I don't understand why they're worried that someone whose polling has been consistently high in just about every state is going to win the nomination. Seems like the sort of thing that's great for general turnout to me

Yeah on the one hand, the recent history of down-ballot candidates trying to run away from the president or nominee at the top of the ticket is not very good. On the other hand, I tend to defer to congressmen and women understanding their districts better than online armchair pundits like myself, particularly if they're representing red and purple districts.

OfficerRob · Feb 25, 2020

Voting out moderate Dems is a wonderful way to lose the House and give the Republicans a supermajority in the Senate. Maybe have a little bit of perspective about the country you live in...

snipe_25 · Feb 25, 2020

So I know we said that an economic downturn would severely hurt Trump/GOP arguments, but what about the Democratic candidates on the Left? I'm old enough to remember the country going into austerity-fever during the 2008 downturn. Will that hurt the candidates talking about vastly increasing spending for liberal policies?

Tamanon · Feb 25, 2020

Was the tea party actually successful? They abandoned their anti-spending agenda the second the black man was gone.

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

The reason people in swing districts worry about Bernie is because of straight ticket voting. If Bernie loses their district there's a good chance they lose it too.

snipe_25 said:
So I know we said that an economic downturn would severely hurt Trump/GOP arguments, but what about the Democratic candidates on the Left? I'm old enough to remember the country going into austerity-fever during the 2008 downturn. Will that hurt the candidates talking about vastly increasing spending for liberal policies?

No, it'll hurt the GOP because they have to own it. Austerity-fever was a Tea Party/2010 thing. No one who wanted to be President was talking about it in 2008.

XenodudeX · Feb 25, 2020

Tamanon said:
Was the tea party actually successful? They abandoned their anti-spending agenda the second the black man was gone.

It got them into power, so yeah it was successful.

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

XenodudeX said:
It got them into power, so yeah it was successful.

The effects that got the GOP into power were systemic due to the Dems holding the WH. It's why we had big Dem gains in 2018/losses in 1994.

Arm Van Dam · Feb 25, 2020

Tamanon said:
Was the tea party actually successful? They abandoned their anti-spending agenda the second the black man was gone.

The tea party pretty much got morphed into the current GOP so yes

Greigor the FellHand · Feb 25, 2020

Tamanon said:
Was the tea party actually successful? They abandoned their anti-spending agenda the second the black man was gone.

They got into power and altered the whole party to the more extreme. Then the hardliner remnants became the freedom caucus

Arm Van Dam · Feb 25, 2020

Biden campaign actually spending for ST

UPDATE: The Biden campaign is placing their first Super Tuesday TV ad spending

We've tracked buys in NC so far. Start date is tomorrow, 2/26

Linkura · Feb 25, 2020

Arm Van Dam said:
Biden campaign actually spending for ST

MEGATON

snipe_25 · Feb 25, 2020

Kirblar said:
The reason people in swing districts worry about Bernie is because of straight ticket voting. If Bernie loses their district there's a good chance they lose it too.

No, it'll hurt the GOP because they have to own it. Austerity-fever was a Tea Party/2010 thing. No one who wanted to be President was talking about it in 2008.

Own it in the simple sense of them being power at the time, or that their policies (I.E. tax cuts) are contributing to the ills of the economy?

Tamanon · Feb 25, 2020

Arm Van Dam said:
The tea party pretty much got morphed into the current GOP so yes

I mean.... have they? I think it just was the tea party being revealed to being a fake thing, not some new political philosophy.

"Lower spending, stop government overreach, the deficit is king!" And it was all a bunch of nonsense. The GOP didn't move to them, they were just a new face on the same shit.

Deleted member 48897 · Feb 25, 2020

Kirblar said:
You shouldn't. The Tea Party actively hindered the GOP in 2010->2014, losing them many winnable seats and accidentally helped Dems lessen their marginal losses. Actively purging your moderates is a self-destructive, nihilistic political strategy.

Between the fact that the GOP still has their senate gains from the 2016 election and solid control of the supreme court right now I'm not going to be too worried about long-term backlash. Plus I think guaranteed health care coverage is something people actually want in comparison to whatever snake oil Trump's been peddling the last few years.

Blader · Feb 25, 2020

Kirblar said:
The effects that got the GOP into power were systemic due to the Dems holding the WH. It's why we had big Dem gains in 2018/losses in 1994.

The GOP wins in 2010 and 2014 were particularly strong though. Wasn't 2010 the biggest gain in house seats for a single party?

I think it's a combination of both historical trends of midterms benefiting the party not inside the White House + the particular Tea Party brand capitalizing on post-Obama racial animus. And even if it wasn't the Tea Party alone that catapulted them into power, they were the ones who managed to ride that wave into power. And previously fringe views, like the hawkish xenophobia of the Jeff Sessions and Stephen Millers of the party, are now front and center. So there's something to be said that they were at least in the right place at the right place.

AnotherNils · Feb 25, 2020

I just realized that compared to Grenell, Ratcliffe looks qualified for DNI

SquirrelSr · Feb 25, 2020

Wasn't the Tea Party eventually taken over by rich people?

Steel · Feb 25, 2020

Blader said:
The GOP wins in 2010 and 2014 were particularly strong though. Wasn't 2010 the biggest gain in house seats for a single party?

I think it's a combination of both historical trends of midterms benefiting the party not inside the White House + the particular Tea Party brand capitalizing on post-Obama racial animus. And even if it wasn't the Tea Party alone that catapulted them into power, they were the ones who managed to ride that wave into power. And previously fringe views, like the hawkish xenophobia of the Jeff Sessions and Stephen Millers of the party, are now front and center. So there's something to be said that they were at least in the right place at the right place.

2018 actually beat 2010 for house seat gain by a decent margin with higher turnout.

Anywho, the whole get the moderates out idea seems to assume a level playing field. GOP benefit from the way Congress is drawn up disproptionately, so they have more room to manuever.

Even then they still need their on-paper "moderate darlings".

AnotherNils said:
I just realized that compared to Grenell, Ratcliffe looks qualified for DNI

Lowered bars are nice. Like, I almost miss Sessions as AG at this point, so..... fuck.

AnotherNils · Feb 25, 2020

SquirrelSr said:
Wasn't the Tea Party eventually taken over by rich people?

The tea party became establishment would be the simplest way to put it.

FreezePeach · Feb 25, 2020

I feel like large groups of voters in one place isnt going to work out too well with the coronavirus.

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

muteKi said:
Between the fact that the GOP still has their senate gains from the 2016 election and solid control of the supreme court right now I'm not going to be too worried about long-term backlash. Plus I think guaranteed health care coverage is something people actually want in comparison to whatever snake oil Trump's been peddling the last few years.

They want it, but people don't want it at the expense of what they currently have. Loss Aversion is an incredibly powerful thing psychologically.

snipe_25 said:
Own it in the simple sense of them being power at the time, or that their policies (I.E. tax cuts) are contributing to the ills of the economy?

Being in power at the time.

Tamanon · Feb 25, 2020

FreezePeach said:
I feel like large groups of voters in one place isnt going to work out too well with the coronavirus.

Finally a way to discourage caucuses.

Tamanon · Feb 25, 2020

I guess my point is that you can see the tea party's success is because they repackaged the party and faked a different set of goals. Then they just dropped the mask and had business as usual.

The Occupy movement didn't see any measure of success, if only because it was an actual movement.

AnotherNils · Feb 25, 2020

Tamanon said:
I guess my point is that you can see the tea party's success is because they repackaged the party and faked a different set of goals. Then they just dropped the mask and had business as usual.

The Occupy movement didn't see any measure of success, if only because it was an actual movement.

I do wonder where age, resources, and background fit in on the contrast here.

Joe Shlabotnik · Feb 25, 2020

Kirblar said:
You shouldn't. The Tea Party actively hindered the GOP in 2010->2014, losing them many winnable seats and accidentally helped Dems lessen their marginal losses. Actively purging your moderates is a self-destructive, nihilistic political strategy.

Man, you run ONE witch and everyone jumps down your throat about it.

PKrockin · Feb 25, 2020

SquirrelSr said:
Wasn't the Tea Party eventually taken over by rich people?

My current understanding is that billionaires and certain corporate interests played a very large part in funding and coordinating it while trying to pass it off as a grassroots movement from the beginning. But at the time I was all in with the tea party, drinking the kool-aid, if you will, so I'm not that familiar with what was really happening behind the scenes.

Study Confirms Tea Party Was Created by Big Tobacco and Billionaire Koch Brothers

Slim Action · Feb 25, 2020

Remember when Eric Cantor didn't bother to campaign and then lost his seat to a random schoolteacher?

Kaitos · Feb 25, 2020

Funny enough, that Vox article about "actually", why Bernie's numbers don't hold up as well as the moderates runs afoul to Nate Cohn's rule of polling.

When people say they're going to vote, believe them. You can track the likelihood with past voter behavior, but there's no reason to discount someone who says they're going to vote or not necessarily believe them. That's how he builds his LV model and it's worked really really really well for Siena/NYT.

EDIT: Here's a good academic article about why you should be open to changing your priors when making an LV model http://justinhgross.com/wp-content/...-Schaffner-Gross_The-Elusive-Likely-Voter.pdf

Tamanon · Feb 25, 2020

Joe Shlabotnik said:
Man, you run ONE witch and everyone jumps down your throat about it.

Sir. She clearly stated she was not a witch. #believewomen

Arm Van Dam · Feb 25, 2020

Slim Action said:
Remember when Eric Cantor didn't bother to campaign and then lost his seat to a random schoolteacher?

And then the random schoolteacher randomly sprouts out Nancy's name like a garden hose and loses that same seat 4 years later?

Avinash117 · Feb 25, 2020

Arm Van Dam said:
The tea party pretty much got morphed into the current GOP so yes

But a more extreme GOP was partially the reason the GOP lost seats in the House?

Naijaboy · Feb 25, 2020

My understanding is that rich people help funded and stur the Tea Party to get rid of any remaining Blue Dog Democrats. But the establishment lost control, made evident when Cantor lost. Eventually, the inmates managed to take over and now have their savior that is Donald Trump. But it was that point when people in the cities and suburbs finally got fed up with the party and started voting them out en mass.l, led by a much more organically made Resistence.

xenocide · Feb 25, 2020

SquirrelSr said:
Wasn't the Tea Party eventually taken over by rich people?

If by "eventually taken over by" you mean "created by" then Yes.

FreezePeach · Feb 25, 2020

My spidey sense is tingling that this coronavirus is gonna really cause havoc. Its a perfect storm of fuckery. Germaphobe, very old president gonna lash out in some crazy way. Markets are tanking. People arent gonna go to the doctor because of the money factor in US healthcare. And its a fucking election year with our last shot to oust the dictator who im sure would love to cancel elections. Turnout will be massively suppressed if there are outbreaks everywhere.

RastaMentality · Feb 25, 2020

FreezePeach said:
My spidey sense is tingling that this coronavirus is gonna really cause havoc. Its a perfect storm of fuckery. Germaphobe, very old president gonna lash out in some crazy way. Markets are tanking. People arent gonna go to the doctor because of the money factor in US healthcare. And its a fucking election year with our last shot to oust the dictator who im sure would love to cancel elections. Turnout will be massively suppressed if there are outbreaks everywhere.

Lets hope it completely ends by July like SARS. Because if it doesn't, the Olympics will also be cancelled and that'll cause even more havoc.

Kirblar · Feb 25, 2020

FreezePeach said:
My spidey sense is tingling that this coronavirus is gonna really cause havoc. Its a perfect storm of fuckery. Germaphobe, very old president gonna lash out in some crazy way. Markets are tanking. People arent gonna go to the doctor because of the money factor in US healthcare. And its a fucking election year with our last shot to oust the dictator who im sure would love to cancel elections. Turnout will be massively suppressed if there are outbreaks everywhere.

It should be. Industry specialists are very worried about the effects it's having on worldwide production supply chains.

Teggy · Feb 25, 2020

Seem to be getting some conflicting info from the executive and his admin

CDC warns it expects coronavirus to spread in U.S. — The Wall Street Journal

Federal health authorities said they now expect a wider spread of the new coronavirus in the U.S. and are preparing for a potential pandemic, though they still are unsure about how severe the health threat could be.

apple.news

xenocide · Feb 25, 2020

Kirblar said:
It should be. Industry specialists are very worried about the effects it's having on worldwide production supply chains.

It's already negatively effecting businesses in the US. Our GM had a town hall last night and spoke at length about how it was negatively effecting our business.

Dahbomb · Feb 25, 2020

FreezePeach said:
My spidey sense is tingling that this coronavirus is gonna really cause havoc. Its a perfect storm of fuckery. Germaphobe, very old president gonna lash out in some crazy way. Markets are tanking. People arent gonna go to the doctor because of the money factor in US healthcare. And its a fucking election year with our last shot to oust the dictator who im sure would love to cancel elections. Turnout will be massively suppressed if there are outbreaks everywhere.

Yeah this is making me nervous as well. More than the virus/outbreak itself is the sheer panic and fear it creates, which is what authoritarian governments strive on. I don't even want to imagine how Trump is going to manage the virus if it breaks out in the US and he specifically starts quarantining minority areas, suppressing their votes in the fall.

Rag · Feb 25, 2020

I'm an idiot and didn't realize that my lovely state of Idaho switched from a Caucus to a Primary. I'm really happy about that. Gonna go early vote for Warren this week sometime.

Deleted member 13101 · Feb 25, 2020

RastaMentality said:
Lets hope it completely ends by July like SARS. Because if it doesn't, the Olympics will also be cancelled and that'll cause even more havoc.

And the party national conventions coming up at that time, too.

US PoliEra 2020 |OT 3| "I think he's learned his lesson" says The Concerned Immoderate Darling Collins.

User requested account closure

self-requested ban

self-requested ban

User requested account closure

Tens across the board!

self-requested ban

Community Resettler