Democrat Debates

[Wacka]

Any Dem candidate = McGovern 2.0

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

You know they’re completely out of ideas when the best they can come up with is ‘OK how about we just give everyone $1,000 per month’!  ?

[B-Man]

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MY FAVORITE:

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

[Deranged Rhino]

8 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

All he has to do is be slightly more likable than Hillary as the thought of another Trump four years alone will increase turnout as many people stayed home assuming Hillary would win.  If the election was held today between Biden and Trump it would be a coin flip.

 

Whoever runs for the left needs to take the independents who voted for Trump over Clinton back. 

 

Joe can’t do that. He’s incapable of it because he’s so beltway his blood type is DC. Those voters who abandon the left for trump did so because they wanted an outsider, not more of the same. 

 

Joe will not be able to motivate those people to flip or the younger progressive base who drives social media to turn out. 

 

He cant win. 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Deranged Rhino

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Doc Brown]

2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Whoever runs for the left needs to take the independents who voted for Trump over Clinton back. 

 

Joe can’t do that. He’s incapable of it because he’s so beltway his blood type is DC. Those voters who abandon the left for trump did so because they wanted an outsider, not more of the same. 

 

Joe will not be able to motivate those people to flip or the younger progressive base who drives social media to turn out. 

 

He cant win. 

Trump won by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, MI, and WI.  All by under 1%.  I can't see any democratic candidate suppressing the vote more than Hillary.  I think Biden could easily get at 2 to 5% bump in those states as Biden doesn't need to win the Obama/Trump voters back.  You underestimate his chances.  

[3rdnlng]

14 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Trump won by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, MI, and WI.  All by under 1%.  I can't see any democratic candidate suppressing the vote more than Hillary.  I think Biden could easily get at 2 to 5% bump in those states as Biden doesn't need to win the Obama/Trump voters back.  You underestimate his chances.  

Go back in time and try to remember the fear that people had of the unknown as it pertains to Donald Trump. The stock market didn't crash and we didn't go to war. Blacks weren't put back in chains. Things are going pretty well and regardless of what people think of some of Trump's statements, they aren't going to toss him overboard for a green new deal or open borders. If Biden somehow gets the nomination he will be eviscerated by Trump. Remember this...………………………..mocking is the death knell to a candidate and Biden is very susceptible to that, while Trump is an expert in dishing it out.

[Deranged Rhino]

39 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Trump won by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, MI, and WI.  All by under 1%.  I can't see any democratic candidate suppressing the vote more than Hillary.  I think Biden could easily get at 2 to 5% bump in those states as Biden doesn't need to win the Obama/Trump voters back.  You underestimate his chances.  

 

I disagree. Whomever runs needs to either win those voters back or spike the turnout in the progressive fringes of the party. 

 

Progressives hate Biden and won’t turn out for him.  That’s fact not opinion. Fact based on countless conversations w progressives in LA about Biden. 

 

That leaves only one option for Joe to win the general: he must win back the ones the party lost in 2016 to Trump, and the independents who went Trump. The problem for Joe is that group of voters by and large share the progressive distaste for establishment figures — which Joe is every bit as much as Hillary was. 

 

Joe has no chance to win. 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Deranged Rhino

[Doc Brown]

15 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Go back in time and try to remember the fear that people had of the unknown as it pertains to Donald Trump. The stock market didn't crash and we didn't go to war. Blacks weren't put back in chains. Things are going pretty well and regardless of what people think of some of Trump's statements, they aren't going to toss him overboard for a green new deal or open borders. If Biden somehow gets the nomination he will be eviscerated by Trump. Remember this...………………………..mocking is the death knell to a candidate and Biden is very susceptible to that, while Trump is an expert in dishing it out.

That's exactly why Biden is the most dangerous because he's was to the right of Warren/Sanders/Castro/Booker etc. when it comes to immigration and combating climate change.  People won't buy that line of attack considering he's been around forever and was vice president under the "deporter in chief."  A lot of undecideds will see Biden as somebody who won't rock the boat (the economy too much and is more palatable than Trump.  I don't see Biden attacking B-list celebrities on twitter or calling Americans SOB's at rallies.  Plus, the mocking was seen as fresh in 2016 while it's just seen as tired and plain mean now to everybody outside his base.

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I disagree. Whomever runs needs to either win those voters back or spike the turnout in the progressive fringes of the party. 

 

Progressives hate Biden and won’t turn out for him.  That’s fact not opinion. Fact based on countless conversations w progressives in LA about Biden. 

 

That leaves only one option for Joe to win the general: he just win back the ones the party lost in 2016 to Trump, and the independents who went Trump. The problem for Joe is that group of voters by and large share the progressive distaste for establishment figures — which Joe is every bit as much as Hillary was. 

 

Joe has no chance to win. 

You live in California.  The rest of the country is more moderate.  Especially black voters.  Don't underestimate how being the VP under Obama can drive up turnout.  Plus, the election is more than a year away so speculating about it now is difficult.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

You live in California.  The rest of the country is more moderate.  Especially black voters.  Don't underestimate how being the VP under Obama can drive up turnout.  Plus, the election is more than a year away so speculating about it now is difficult.

 

Entirely agree -- and doubly so if 44 goes out and pats Joe on the shoulder that would help. But without that he's bleeding black voters, especially young black voters. Between now and SC I'm not sure he'll be able to plug all the leaks in the dam. But I don't think 44 wants to endorse Joe, and without that, he's not going to be able to keep that base. Obama knows, better than most, that if Joe runs in the general he would lose -- and that would be another Trump victory over 44's legacy. 

 

And that's what 44 cares most about. 

 

Thus, he's eyeing anyone other than the 10 on that stage for his support.

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Entirely agree -- and doubly so if 44 goes out and pats Joe on the shoulder that would help. But without that he's bleeding black voters, especially young black voters. Between now and SC I'm not sure he'll be able to plug all the leaks in the dam. But I don't think 44 wants to endorse Joe, and without that, he's not going to be able to keep that base. Obama knows, better than most, that if Joe runs in the general he would lose -- and that would be another Trump victory over 44's legacy. 

 

And that's what 44 cares most about. 

 

Thus, he's eyeing anyone other than the 10 on that stage for his support.

This. When has Obama ever actually done anything for someone else?

[Doc Brown]

21 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Entirely agree -- and doubly so if 44 goes out and pats Joe on the shoulder that would help. But without that he's bleeding black voters, especially young black voters. Between now and SC I'm not sure he'll be able to plug all the leaks in the dam. But I don't think 44 wants to endorse Joe, and without that, he's not going to be able to keep that base. Obama knows, better than most, that if Joe runs in the general he would lose -- and that would be another Trump victory over 44's legacy. 

 

And that's what 44 cares most about. 

 

Thus, he's eyeing anyone other than the 10 on that stage for his support.

Yeah.  A lot can happen between now and next year at this time.  You make a good point with the lack of enthusiasm problem Biden has but seem to downplay the disgust that so many people have for Trump's conduct.  It's a long way away to be making predictions now, but simply stating "Biden can't win" to me is just ignoring the basic results of how close the last election was and the midterm results.  

[3rdnlng]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

Yeah.  A lot can happen between now and next year at this time.  You make a good point with the lack of enthusiasm problem Biden has but seem to downplay the disgust that so many people have for Trump's conduct.  It's a long way away to be making predictions now, but simply stating "Biden can't win" to me is just ignoring the basic results of how close the last election was and the midterm results.  

That works against Biden, giving him a lot of time to make him look old and foolish. He's a gaffe machine and will be mocked for his misstatements. 

[Doc Brown]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

That works against Biden, giving him a lot of time to make him look old and foolish. He's a gaffe machine and will be mocked for his misstatements. 

It may be a good thing nowadays considering he's running against Trump who recently suggested nuking a hurricane.  Makes Biden seem less robotic.

[Deranged Rhino]

5 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Yeah.  A lot can happen between now and next year at this time.  You make a good point with the lack of enthusiasm problem Biden has but seem to downplay the disgust that so many people have for Trump's conduct.  It's a long way away to be making predictions now, but simply stating "Biden can't win" to me is just ignoring the basic results of how close the last election was and the midterm results.  

 

 

Just to address where this comes from in my takes -- it comes from the belief that Trump has gained more supporters than he's lost in the ensuing 2 1/2 years, and the anticipation that number will rise steadily when presented with the option of Trump or the establishment of old. You point out the "disgust so many have" for Trump -- which, per the media, is valid. I just happen to suspect that's being wildly overblown by a media which has proven themselves to be narrative engineers more than truth tellers in the past 48 months. 

 

 

[Doc Brown]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Just to address where this comes from in my takes -- it comes from the belief that Trump has gained more supporters than he's lost in the ensuing 2 1/2 years, and the anticipation that number will rise steadily when presented with the option of Trump or the establishment of old. You point out the "disgust so many have" for Trump -- which, per the media, is valid. I just happen to suspect that's being wildly overblown by a media which has proven themselves to be narrative engineers more than truth tellers in the past 48 months.

It's anecdotal on my part but I know people who can't even look at the guy when he's on tv who didn't vote last election assuming Hillary would win.  Most of whom are middle aged women.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Doc Brown said:

It's anecdotal on my part but I know people who can't even look at the guy when he's on tv who didn't vote last election assuming Hillary would win.  Most of whom are middle aged women.

 

The question will be what their reactions will be when SpyGate is exposed and arrests are made. 

 

That will be the test for a lot of people who will suddenly see, without equivocation, just who's been lying to them for the last three years and how insidiously it was done. Some of these people won't be able to accept it, so deep is the programming. But I'm betting on the majority realizing they've been had and going to the polls pissed off. 

[3rdnlng]

13 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It may be a good thing nowadays considering he's running against Trump who recently suggested nuking a hurricane.  Makes Biden seem less robotic.

Trump never suggested that, it's just more slantedshit by the media & the Left.

[Chef Jim]

12 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's anecdotal on my part but I know people who can't even look at the guy when he's on tv who didn't vote last election assuming Hillary would win.  Most of whom are middle aged women.

 

How many of those people are in states that Trump likely won’t win anyway? 

[Doc Brown]

4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Trump never suggested that, it's just more slantedshit by the media & the Left.

Fine.  A guy who said the World Trade centers came down on 7/11 at a rally right here in Buffalo.

3 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

How many of those people are in states that Trump likely won’t win anyway? 

I don't know but a Buffalo suburb isn't that different than suburbs in the crucial Midwest states. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

26 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's anecdotal on my part but I know people who can't even look at the guy when he's on tv who didn't vote last election assuming Hillary would win.  Most of whom are middle aged women.

 

As a middle aged woman, that was not my experience at all. My female friends, relatives, and women on a shitton of blogs I read (for the last 10+ years) would have crawled over broken glass to vote for Hillary.

 

As as of now, even the most vocal Trump-haters from after the election  have toned it down, and many are at the "you gotta be kidding me" stage with the Democratic candidate offerings.

 

Heck, I have a friend whose kid was afraid of being locked up after Trump was elected (I told the story here, Jewish, screaming liberal family, he was 11 at the time) who is now no longer opposed to voting for Trump! The complete turn around with her is amazing.

 

Don't assume the Ds have the middle aged woman, or the suburban mom, vote locked up this time. 

[Doc Brown]

4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

As a middle aged woman, that was not my experience at all. My female friends, relatives, and women on a shitton of blogs I read (for the last 10+ years) would have crawled over broken glass to vote for Hillary.

 

As as of now, even the most vocal Trump-haters from after the election  have toned it down, and many are at the "you gotta be kidding me" stage with the Democratic candidate offerings.

 

Heck, I have a friend whose kid was afraid of being locked up after Trump was elected (I told the story here, Jewish, screaming liberal family, he was 11 at the time) who is now no longer opposed to voting for Trump! The complete turn around with her is amazing.

 

Don't assume the Ds have the middle aged woman, or the suburban mom, vote locked up this time. 

That's why I qualified that it was anecdotal on my part.  We'll see what the polls show as we get closer to the election.

[Koko78]

4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Trump won by a combined 70,000 votes in PA, MI, and WI.  All by under 1%.  I can't see any democratic candidate suppressing the vote more than Hillary.  I think Biden could easily get at 2 to 5% bump in those states as Biden doesn't need to win the Obama/Trump voters back.  You underestimate his chances.  

 

The fundamental flaw in your logic is assuming that everything is the same as it was in 2016. People do, in fact, look at their 401(k)s and job opportunities when voting.

 

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Fine.  A guy who said the World Trade centers came down on 7/11 at a rally right here in Buffalo.

 

Well, if you want to pretend that misspeaking on the fly means much, which one of the 57 states was the WTC in?

Edited September 14, 2019 by Koko78

[Doc Brown]

 

41 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

Well, if you want to pretend that misspeaking on the fly means much, which one of the 57 states was the WTC in?

I was just pointing out that presidential gaffes don't mean much as if they'd actually hurt Biden.  Bush won twice despite his dream that human beings and fish can coexist equally.

[Koko78]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

 

I was just pointing out that presidential gaffes don't mean much as if they'd actually hurt Biden.  Bush won twice despite his dream that human beings and fish can coexist equally.

 

Biden's problem isn't so much the gaffes themselves (he's been a gaffe machine for nearly 50 years). It's that he's going off into fantasy-land far too often with his stories, which feeds into the attack narrative that he's going senile.

[/dev/null]

4 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

I don't know but a Buffalo suburb isn't that different than suburbs in the crucial Midwest states. 

 

Suburbs in crucial Midwestern states don't have their votes rendered irrelevant by New York City

[Doc Brown]

27 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

Suburbs in crucial Midwestern states don't have their votes rendered irrelevant by New York City

Electoral college sucks  

[transplantbillsfan]

19 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

In other words... you can't. 

 

Without the progressive turnout, no one on the left can win the general. 

(which is the point)

 

Joe doesn't drive that excitement. He's incapable of it.

 

Not letting Donald Trump win a 2nd term drives the excitement.

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Koko78 said:

Biden's problem isn't so much the gaffes themselves (he's been a gaffe machine for nearly 50 years). It's that he's going off into fantasy-land far too often with his stories, which feeds into the attack narrative that he's going senile.

I agree with that.  He just seems 15 years older than Trump, Warren, and Sanders.  He'll obviously pick a younger VP if he wins the nomination with some experience.  I always thought there should be an age limit to run for president like their is a minimum age.

[3rdnlng]

7 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Not letting Donald Trump win a 2nd term drives the excitement.

Teachers unite!

[Deranged Rhino]

12 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Not letting Donald Trump win a 2nd term drives the excitement.

 

Not enough to win. 

 

Which is the point  

[3rdnlng]

6 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I agree with that.  He just seems 15 years older than Trump, Warren, and Sanders.  He'll obviously pick a younger VP if he wins the nomination with some experience.  I always thought there should be an age limit to run for president like their is a minimum age.

People age differently and you are proposing that the American people cannot make a coherent decision regarding the soundness of mind of a particular candidate. As long as the mind is still sharp then the public has the great opportunity to have a more experienced person in office. Trump's mind and energy for example far exceeds his recent predecessors.

[/dev/null]

19 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Electoral college sucks  

Something we disagree on

 

What are your thoughts on breaking larger states like NY, CA, and TX into smaller states?  Or parts of one state breaking off to join with another?

[Doc Brown]

5 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

People age differently and you are proposing that the American people cannot make a coherent decision regarding the soundness of mind of a particular candidate. As long as the mind is still sharp then the public has the great opportunity to have a more experienced person in office. Trump's mind and energy for example far exceeds his recent predecessors.

I agree as setting an age limit would be a subjective number.  So is setting an age minimum though.

1 minute ago, /dev/null said:

Something we disagree on

 

What are your thoughts on breaking larger states like NY, CA, and TX into smaller states?  Or parts of one state breaking off to join with another?

I'm for the electoral college as I don't want president's only pretending to care about the needs of the largest states.  You just seemed to make an argument for it.

 

I wouldn't mind breaking up states like NY and CA but to keep it at 50 you'd need to combine states with sparse populations like North Dakota/South Dakota or Vermont/Maine.

[/dev/null]

42 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I wouldn't mind breaking up states like NY and CA but to keep it at 50 you'd need to combine states with sparse populations like North Dakota/South Dakota or Vermont/Maine.

Why keep the number of states at 50?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

I agree with that.  He just seems 15 years older than Trump, Warren, and Sanders.  He'll obviously pick a younger VP if he wins the nomination with some experience.  I always thought there should be an age limit to run for president like their is a minimum age.

I guess I'm confused on hold Sanders appears to be on your tv?  He presents as about 87 on my screen, even with the man-of-the-people-absent-minded professor shtick he's perfected on his way to becoming a filthy rich politician.  

 

I think Biden looks pretty good all things considered.  He clearly didn't go to Maury's Wig Emporium for the weave, whatever nips and tucks he's had  probably weren't done in Scranton, and he keep himself in good shape.  It's when he starts talking that it all falls apart, and the bloodied eyeball isn't a great look.  

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

I agree as setting an age limit would be a subjective number.  So is setting an age minimum though.

I'm for the electoral college as I don't want president's only pretending to care about the needs of the largest states.  You just seemed to make an argument for it.

 

I wouldn't mind breaking up states like NY and CA but to keep it at 50 you'd need to combine states with sparse populations like North Dakota/South Dakota or Vermont/Maine.

Vermont/Maine?  Why not Arkansas and Wyoming?  W.Va and NM?

[Doc Brown]

58 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

Why keep the number of states at 50?

I don't want to buy another flag.

49 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I guess I'm confused on hold Sanders appears to be on your tv?  He presents as about 87 on my screen, even with the man-of-the-people-absent-minded professor shtick he's perfected on his way to becoming a filthy rich politician.  

 

I think Biden looks pretty good all things considered.  He clearly didn't go to Maury's Wig Emporium for the weave, whatever nips and tucks he's had  probably weren't done in Scranton, and he keep himself in good shape.  It's when he starts talking that it all falls apart, and the bloodied eyeball isn't a great look.  

I laughed when Bernie had to tell Biden by whispering in his ear what the idiot at the end of the stage said about his health care plan.  Bernie's been 45 his whole life.  The trouble with Biden is he's never been a coherent speaker so it's tough to differentiate whether he's going senile or it's just being himself.

30 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Vermont/Maine?  Why not Arkansas and Wyoming?  W.Va and NM?

Sure.  Use your imagination.  At minimum North and South Dakota though.  Maybe attach Delaware to Maryland.

[transplantbillsfan]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Not enough to win. 

 

Which is the point  

 

Piss poor point, considering you're wrong.