Election 2020

[frae]

I think this sets up well for Warren.

I agree the other debate could be crazy she should handle her business but I would like to see someone else punch through as viable from that debate.

[DMT]

I agree the other debate could be crazy she should handle her business but I would like to see someone else punch through as viable from that debate.

I'd prefer Gabbard be that someone else, hopefully she gets to flex her foreign policy chops.

[Teenwolf]

Debate groups announced:

https://twitter.com/reidepstein/stat...934439936?s=19

Weird lineups. If you fully believe polling, only Warren has a shot on her debate night, the rest are all going nowhere. Almost as if the DNC is giving Warren protection to split the Bernie vote, but I still think each of them can grow their base above 25%, leading to a Bernie/Warren ticket. Hey, just my complete distrust in the DNC... but i think they're miscalculating.

I guarantee NBC picks the Biden night.

PURPLE: bernie, harris, biden, buttigieg, bennet, williamson, swalwell gillibrand, yang, hickenlooper

ORANGE: booker, warren, beto, klobuchar, delaney, tulsi, castro, ryan, de blasio, Inslee

[frae]

If the establishment was going to protect someone it would be Biden. They put him on stage with 3 of the other members of the top 5 including Sanders. I also will guarantee the ticket is no combo of Sanders and Warren. They are both almost 70 northeast liberals. The ticket will get some age and region balance even if they don’t get someone less to the left.

[Teenwolf]

If the establishment was going to protect someone it would be Biden. They put him on stage with 3 of the other members of the top 5 including Sanders. I also will guarantee the ticket is no combo of Sanders and Warren. They are both almost 70 northeast liberals. The ticket will get some age and region balance even if they don’t get someone less to the left.

The only reason I say Sanders/Warren have a shot, is that the DNC have explicitly stated that at the convention, upon the first round of voting, if no candidate has secured 50+% of the vote, and no unity ticket between 2 candidates totaling 50+% of the vote is made, then the voting goes to a 2nd round, wherein the superdelegates rig... I mean vote. Anyway, if Bernie and Warren manage to each gain voters, and end up with say Sanders 35/Warren 25, wouldn't it be hard for the DNC to say "no, we cant have 2 progressives in the white house, regardless of their share of votes"? I understand that the DNC wouldn't want it, and mainstream media would shit all over it... but the DNC will try and use this to say "Bernie, you're picking whichever centrist is behind Warren, and if you don't, then we'll see how the superdelegates vote." So you're probably right that if either Bernie or Warren take the nomination, they'll get stuck with a runner-up centrist.

[frae]

The only reason I say Sanders/Warren have a shot, is that the DNC have explicitly stated that at the convention, upon the first round of voting, if no candidate has secured 50+% of the vote, and no unity ticket between 2 candidates totaling 50+% of the vote is made, then the voting goes to a 2nd round, wherein the superdelegates rig... I mean vote. Anyway, if Bernie and Warren manage to each gain voters, and end up with say Sanders 35/Warren 25, wouldn't it be hard for the DNC to say "no, we cant have 2 progressives in the white house, regardless of their share of votes"? I understand that the DNC wouldn't want it, and mainstream media would shit all over it... but the DNC will try and use this to say "Bernie, you're picking whichever centrist is behind Warren, and if you don't, then we'll see how the superdelegates vote." So you're probably right that if either Bernie or Warren take the nomination, they'll get stuck with a runner-up centrist.

Being right of Sanders isn't hard but outside of Biden I am not sold on the other top candidates being called centrists. Harris is Sen from probably our most liberal state, Pete doesn't strike me as just a centrist, then you get into the 2nd tier. Klobuchar is more of a moderate, Beto seems like a solid liberal. The Gov are moderate guys Bullock and Hickenlooper. Gillibrand probably doesn't want it since she is so young for the senate. We will see, but I think if we have a traditional nomination we wind up with some sort of regional balance and definitely some age balance if it is one of Biden Sanders, and Warren.

[Teenwolf]

Being right of Sanders isn't hard but outside of Biden I am not sold on the other top candidates being called centrists. Harris is Sen from probably our most liberal state, Pete doesn't strike me as just a centrist, then you get into the 2nd tier. Klobuchar is more of a moderate, Beto seems like a solid liberal. The Gov are moderate guys Bullock and Hickenlooper. Gillibrand probably doesn't want it since she is so young for the senate. We will see, but I think if we have a traditional nomination we wind up with some sort of regional balance and definitely some age balance if it is one of Biden Sanders, and Warren.

From left to center right:

Sanders, Tulsi, Warren, Harris, Beto, Buttigieg, Biden

I hope Yang doesn't rise, as he draws from Bernie (although oddly I place him around the Beto-Butti range as I view his main policy as highly regressive), but other than that, the rest are likely 1%-ers.

[Teenwolf]

Harris and Mayor Pete get a shot at the front runners. Hopefully one has a big night. Warren and Beto in the other group. Maybe Klobuchar or Booker breaks through. Beto has to have a big night.

Are you aware that Buttigieg has consistently spoken about Democrats problem being too policy driven rather than philosophical? I don't think Buttigieg is a serious candidate. He's had a good run so far, but there's nothing there for policy, so that won't excite people. I've come to loathe Buttigieg more than Beto, or maybe even equally to Klobuchar.

Warren and Beto will sound pretty similar, and I'm betting Tulsi crushes them. Oh, Liz Warren wanna tell us about your "Green Militarism" plans? Let's see what Tulsi has to say.

[umjewman]

Are you aware that Buttigieg has consistently spoken about Democrats problem being too policy driven rather than philosophical? I don't think Buttigieg is a serious candidate. He's had a good run so far, but there's nothing there for policy, so that won't excite people. I've come to loathe Buttigieg more than Beto, or maybe even equally to Klobuchar.

I think you might be overestimating how much people really want to hear about policy. I would wager there is an extremely large segment of the electorate whose eyes will just glaze over when a candidate starts drilling deep into policy. Vague and a philosophical optimism could carry him further than you think.

[B-Fly]

I like Buttigieg from a communications and temperament and tone/values leadership standpoint. I think he could be an excellent VP supporting/promoting/socializing the P's policies and message while building helpful relationships in Congress and in the states to facilitate policy advancement. I don't necessarily view him as a first-mover on policy development. It's possible to be a good president without being a first-mover on policy development if you have the right leadership qualities and the right team (e.g., George Washington, maybe Barack Obama to an extent; Reagan if you're a conservative), but my preference is for a policy heavyweight at the top of the ticket.

I would not want Elizabeth Warren to be anyone's running mate. If she's not going to be the President, I think she can add more value in the Senate.

[revo]

I think you might be overestimating how much people really want to hear about policy. I would wager there is an extremely large segment of the electorate whose eyes will just glaze over when a candidate starts drilling deep into policy. Vague and a philosophical optimism could carry him further than you think.

For some reason, TW keeps glazing over the real issue — beating Trump. He seems to think this is a run of the mill election and not an election with the free world at stake. Almost every poll of Dems has their biggest concern — by far — as beating Trump (usually this is the biggest issue by a 70-30 margin).

[Teenwolf]

For some reason, TW keeps glazing over the real issue — beating Trump. He seems to think this is a run of the mill election and not an election with the free world at stake. Almost every poll of Dems has their biggest concern — by far — as beating Trump (usually this is the biggest issue by a 70-30 margin).

Beating Trump doesn't mean shit without giving solutions to fix the problems. Just saying "Trump is evil and bad and his supporters are deplorable" is going to lose again. That's what Biden would do. My hatred of Biden is specifically because he would likely lose to Trump, certainly the most likely to lose to Trump...

So beating Trump is also my priority! I'm just watching the goings on of the campaign cycle closer than you polling nerds.

You prefer to ignore reality, that's fine. I think reading heavily into polling before the 1st of 12 debates while ignoring the day to day happenings is goofy as fuck. I also find it funny that you haven't mentioned Biden's precipitous slide in polling. Slidin' Biden, there's one for Trump.

Nobody taking me up on my avatar bet that Biden loses? I wanna say he drops outside the top 3, but I would do an avatar bet that he doesn't take the nomination. C'mon, you were so confident a month ago, when I said Biden would go down and down as folks find out what a scumbag he is. It's been happening, down 10 pts on RCP. He keeps doing self inflicted damage, I post about it, and you all defend it... yet its cost him 25% of his support, and he hasn't even been in the public eye! Gee, I wonder why nobody will take me up on my bet? Seems my record is pretty solid to this point.

[Judge Jude]

"Seems my record is pretty solid to this point."

I'll bite


what election results have you correctly predicted here or anywhere that outsmarted the polling?

and I hope you appreciate that I am asking a real question - and am willing to appreciate any response.

[GwynnInTheHall]

"Seems my record is pretty solid to this point."

I'll bite


what election results have you correctly predicted here or anywhere that outsmarted the polling?

and I hope you appreciate that I am asking a real question - and am willing to appreciate any response.

I'm pretty sure I have.

Called Trump, Obama twice and nailed Harry Reid to the % in NV.

Trump isn't winning unless the DNC shoots themselves in the foot and makes Biden the guy.

Sanders, Warren, Mayor Pete and Gabbard. Any combination of these 4 win it all.

Any slagging to the center........well you know what I think.

[GwynnInTheHall]

For some reason, TW keeps glazing over the real issue — beating Trump. He seems to think this is a run of the mill election and not an election with the free world at stake. Almost every poll of Dems has their biggest concern — by far — as beating Trump (usually this is the biggest issue by a 70-30 margin).

Beating Trump isn't the real issue.

Restoring integrity/ethics to our democracy is.