Election 2020

[Judge Jude]

I want to see Trump's tax returns - and I want to see the Dem candidates' returns as well.
are most of them out there already? have not followed this

[Teenwolf]

For some reason I looked at CNN.com today. This was the top "story"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/10/politics/bernie-sanders-taxes-millionaire/index.html

Bernie Sanders is (finally) going to release his tax returns. But questions over how he handles his wealth in the context of his campaign for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination remain. And the early returns should be concerning to Sanders' backers.

Such bullshit mainstream media attacks. Several of these attacks against Bernie for not releasing his tax returns for months, and now the narrative shifts to "look at this hypocrite, attacking millionaires, when he's a millionaire himself." Over the winter, they attacked him for wearing a $700 winter coat. They've attacked him for flying in private airplanes (to do 10 Hillary rallies in the last 7 days of the 2016 campaign!)... They've attacked him for not supporting cash transfer reparations, despite NO OTHER candidate supporting the same. They've attacked him for sexual harassment on his campaign despite more egregious stories coming from Gillibrand, Clinton, and Harris campaigns without a peep... They've attacked him as "Trump of the Left" while hailing Harris, Buttigieg, Beto, and Biden as "The ANTI-Trump!"... These attacks will never stop.

Revo, please tell me what is the recommended amount of savings for an average 77 year old to retire in comfort? Is it about $1 Mil? Bernie supposedly earned a hair over $1 Mil for his book sales, despite not being worth more than half a mil into his mid-70's, and they're trying to attack him as an elite. Pathetic smear job.

[Teenwolf]

From the Chris Cilizza article:

Then there is the broader problem of Sanders' wealth as it relates to his core campaign message that "millionaires and billionaires" have cornered far too much wealth and power in this country -- and need to be reined in by a more activist federal government. Now that Sanders is one of those "millionaires and billionaires," it could complicate that message -- and his appeal as the underfunded outsider taking on the monied interested in Washington...

On the most practical level, Sanders is right. He isn't as rich as Trump. There's a big difference between a millionaire and a billionaire. And there's no reason that someone who is wealthy can't speak powerfully about the economic plight of the less fortunate and the deeply negative impact the wealthiest of Americans are having on society.

But this is politics. And the combination of Sanders now being a member of the economic strata he has long derided and his totally tone-deaf answer on how he got there spells at least the potential for trouble down the line for the Vermont senator.

How does this affect anything? Cilizza WANTS this to be a problem for Sanders because Cilizza himself is worth a lot more than $1 Mil. Cillizza had someone tweet at him in 2017 "I'm gonna pay someone to hit me in the head with a brick and then just wait to be offered a six-figure media talker job." Cillizza responds: "Try 8 figures" So Bernie's response is problematic, yet mainstream media is saturated with overpaid hacks who attack progressives because they want to hoard their wealth, and that's what you should expect from the MSM. Cool.

This is supposedly journalism? Bernie can't talk about everything he's talked about since the 60's, because he made it into the millionaire class, and we call that hypocrisy. Okay! I'm sure the scandal of Bernie being worth the exact amount financial planners recommend to have saved by his age is such a scandal that he won't recover, right? All those Bernie Bros won't accept their leader earning some money for the political coalition they're building with him.

What Cilizza should really be scared off isn't the million dollars in Sanders' bank account, it should be the million volunteers, or 525K 1st cycle donors that keeps Cilizza up at night. Go back to bed buddy, the big bad Bernie monster is going away, don't you worry.

[B-Fly]

Biden hanging strong in the polls, even after the invasion-of-body-autonomy stories. Interesting. I do think there's a huge divide between social media Democrats, who I think lean much more heavily progressive and pro-Sanders, and TV news/landline phone Democrats, who appear to feel very positively about Biden. Meanwhile, if anyone has reason to complain about being ignored or dismissed by the media, it's probably the women. Sanders may have been underestimated and ignored too much in 2016, but I do think he's being covered (as well as attacked) as a top contender this year. Ultimately, I think that's good for him, as it gives him plenty of time before the first votes are cast to either address attacks or let them die/fade away, whereas the deep loyalty of his supporters is a crucial advantage in a crowded field. His biggest "victory" so far has been keeping Elizabeth Warren from cutting much into that support. I certainly don't think any of the "ethics"/conduct type attacks on Sanders to date are going to be major problems for him. It's more a question of whether TV news/landline phone Democrats, potential high-profile endorsers, and big-money-influencers view him as too radical to nominate, and whether they can coalesce around one or two alternatives quickly enough to narrow the field to Sanders and one or two more "traditional"/"mainstream" Democrats. So far, I've seen no reason to think Sanders can't win the nomination and the election, particularly if the field stays large through the first month or two of caucuses and primaries. But if Biden officially launches with a big money haul and a spate of big endorsements, he seems like the candidate best positioned to secure that coalescence. If Biden stays out or fizzles, it seems to me that the best performer through Iowa and New Hampshire among Harris/Booker/Beto/Buttigieg might need the others to drop out and endorse the leader from that group.

[Teenwolf]

I pretty much agree with B-Fly's take 100%. I like the odds for Sanders.

Another advantage for Sanders is the polling fading him. Age demographics and landline polling are conspiring to show a small Biden lead when I think it's more of a tie or small Sanders lead. Another unmentioned advantage for Sanders is unlikely voters. I'm sure that Bernie pulls a bigger segment of 2016 non-voters and youth (which includes anybody now 18-22 years old) than anybody else in the field, and those aren't counted in polling as likely voters either.

[Judge Jude]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/polit..._medium=social

(CNN)Joe Biden's road to a third presidential bid has been lined with a series of explanations and apologies, illustrating the challenges of preparing a long record of public service for fresh scrutiny under the spotlight of the 2020 campaign.
Yet he rarely discusses one of the earliest -- and most controversial -- issues he championed in the Senate: his fight against busing to desegregate schools.
It was more than four decades ago as a battle raged across the country -- and in Congress -- over sending white students to majority-black schools and black students to majority-white schools often far away from their own neighborhoods. Biden forcefully opposed the government's role in trying to integrate schools, saying he favored desegregation, but believed busing did not achieve equal opportunity.
In a series of never-before-published letters from Biden, which were reviewed by CNN, the strength of his opposition to busing comes into sharper focus, particularly how he followed the lead of -- and sought support from -- some of the Senate's most fervent segregationists.

................................

[fascinating that these didn't happen to be published in, say, 2008. or 2012. some of the black people who are supposed to be angry now might have been angry then, too. but we take what coincidence gives us.
and yes, fasten your safety belts, everyone - it's gonna be a bumpy ride til Nov 2020!]

[Sour Masher]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/polit..._medium=social

(CNN)Joe Biden's road to a third presidential bid has been lined with a series of explanations and apologies, illustrating the challenges of preparing a long record of public service for fresh scrutiny under the spotlight of the 2020 campaign.
Yet he rarely discusses one of the earliest -- and most controversial -- issues he championed in the Senate: his fight against busing to desegregate schools.
It was more than four decades ago as a battle raged across the country -- and in Congress -- over sending white students to majority-black schools and black students to majority-white schools often far away from their own neighborhoods. Biden forcefully opposed the government's role in trying to integrate schools, saying he favored desegregation, but believed busing did not achieve equal opportunity.
In a series of never-before-published letters from Biden, which were reviewed by CNN, the strength of his opposition to busing comes into sharper focus, particularly how he followed the lead of -- and sought support from -- some of the Senate's most fervent segregationists.

................................

[fascinating that these didn't happen to be published in, say, 2008. or 2012. some of the black people who are supposed to be angry now might have been angry then, too. but we take what coincidence gives us.
and yes, fasten your safety belts, everyone - it's gonna be a bumpy ride til Nov 2020!]

This article sure doesn't read like it is written as a support piece for Biden. This speaks to my point about how it is common for front runners to get heavily scrutinized by the media. I'm not saying there is a general bias this way or that with large media outlets, but I think that is less of a thing that the general trends and cycles the media goes through. They ride the waves back and forth between praise and attacks to get as many eyeballs as possible. There are lots of negative Biden articles out there now. Sanders taking hits this early is at least in part a sign that he is a front runner. It is the gauntlet you must survive to win, and as B-Fly indicated, it is better to get everything possible attack, valid or not, out there early to see if and how a candidate can deal with it and keep going.

I will also say, I'm a little surprised Biden seems to be surviving all this stuff. But if you believe the polls at all, voters are sticking with him for now.

[The Feral Slasher]

This article sure doesn't read like it is written as a support piece for Biden. This speaks to my point about how it is common for front runners to get heavily scrutinized by the media. I'm not saying there is a general bias this way or that with large media outlets, but I think that is less of a thing that the general trends and cycles the media goes through. They ride the waves back and forth between praise and attacks to get as many eyeballs as possible. There are lots of negative Biden articles out there now. Sanders taking hits this early is at least in part a sign that he is a front runner. It is the gauntlet you must survive to win, and as B-Fly indicated, it is better to get everything possible attack, valid or not, out there early to see if and how a candidate can deal with it and keep going.

I will also say, I'm a little surprised Biden seems to be surviving all this stuff. But if you believe the polls at all, voters are sticking with him for now.

It certainly isnt a piece that seems to support Biden. It also is not in huge headlines on their front page like the Sanders piece i linked to. I dont read enough on cnn to know if that is a trend or if it is significant

EDIT: it is listed along with a large number of other articles, including Hilary Clinton claiming that Julian Assange needs to answer for what he has done. And not highlighted like several others. It's just one article so nothing to get too excited about, just like the one Sanders article from yesterday

[revo]

Biden got savaged by last week’s SNL, but poor, poor Dopey can’t take the same criticism and has to whine about it, even threaten them. Awww, poow widdle Twumpy Wumpy.

[Teenwolf]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/polit..._medium=social

(CNN)Joe Biden's road to a third presidential bid has been lined with a series of explanations and apologies, illustrating the challenges of preparing a long record of public service for fresh scrutiny under the spotlight of the 2020 campaign.
Yet he rarely discusses one of the earliest -- and most controversial -- issues he championed in the Senate: his fight against busing to desegregate schools.
It was more than four decades ago as a battle raged across the country -- and in Congress -- over sending white students to majority-black schools and black students to majority-white schools often far away from their own neighborhoods. Biden forcefully opposed the government's role in trying to integrate schools, saying he favored desegregation, but believed busing did not achieve equal opportunity.
In a series of never-before-published letters from Biden, which were reviewed by CNN, the strength of his opposition to busing comes into sharper focus, particularly how he followed the lead of -- and sought support from -- some of the Senate's most fervent segregationists.

................................

[fascinating that these didn't happen to be published in, say, 2008. or 2012. some of the black people who are supposed to be angry now might have been angry then, too. but we take what coincidence gives us.
and yes, fasten your safety belts, everyone - it's gonna be a bumpy ride til Nov 2020!]

I find it bizarre that they continue to make the claim I highlighted. Why is it that all of the attacks on Bernie are nonsense then? There's nothing in Bernie's 50 year public record that he's said which he needs to apologize for. Nothing he needs to explain his evolution on. It's so funny to me that they act like every politician Biden's age has historical skeletons in their closet, yet the attacks on Bernie are all present day. Funny how they disprove their own premise.

I fully believe the powers that be are switching support over to Buttigieg. Morning Joe certainly have. Mika said that Beto has a 50% chance of "saying something weird." So Buttigieg takes over the horoscope candidate lane.

Isn't it funny how Buttigieg is an underdog, so they can prop him up all day long? They write 1000 gushing articles and do endless puff pieces on him in media, then they act surprised that he moves up into the top 5.

[B-Fly]

Meanwhile, I think that Elizabeth Warren still has enough time to get past the foolishness (much of it earned) around her DNA test and claims of Native American heritage, because she's the candidate in the field putting forward the most specific and thoughtful policy proposals, IMO. I'm re-warming to her. I don't intend that as a slight toward any of the other candidates, but I think she deserves serious consideration given her record as a serious policymaker.

[Teenwolf]

Meanwhile, I think that Elizabeth Warren still has enough time to get past the foolishness (much of it earned) around her DNA test and claims of Native American heritage, because she's the candidate in the field putting forward the most specific and thoughtful policy proposals, IMO. I'm re-warming to her. I don't intend that as a slight toward any of the other candidates, but I think she deserves serious consideration given her record as a serious policymaker.

I know you don't care about her backpedal on Universal healthcare, but progressives do. There's a reason she trails Bernie by about 3 or 4-1. She's Bernie-lite, and I think the progressives are coalescing much more around Sanders.

Good policy from her, but I think she's an extreme longshot. If Bernie didn't run, she would have a chance.

[The Feral Slasher]

Meanwhile, I think that Elizabeth Warren still has enough time to get past the foolishness (much of it earned) around her DNA test and claims of Native American heritage, because she's the candidate in the field putting forward the most specific and thoughtful policy proposals, IMO. I'm re-warming to her. I don't intend that as a slight toward any of the other candidates, but I think she deserves serious consideration given her record as a serious policymaker.

I think that whole "controversy" is overplayed and stupid. She would be a much better president than almost anyone who is running in my opinion. Hopefully people can look past that and evaluate her on her policy proposals and positions, because I think she is pretty strong in that regard.

[revo]

I understand this is Rasmussen, but not good news for Bernie fans:

General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	Rasmussen Reports	Sanders 44, Trump 47	Trump +3

[onejayhawk]

Meanwhile, I think that Elizabeth Warren still has enough time to get past the foolishness (much of it earned) around her DNA test and claims of Native American heritage, because she's the candidate in the field putting forward the most specific and thoughtful policy proposals, IMO. I'm re-warming to her. I don't intend that as a slight toward any of the other candidates, but I think she deserves serious consideration given her record as a serious policymaker.

Warren's problem is that she's boring. Beto, Buttigieg, Bernie, even Kamala Harris are not boring.

Beto looks good but is also not smart, so he will eventually take himself out. Harris seems to lack a hook not related to genetics. Buttigieg is very young and still untried. Biden is Biden. It may be that Warren simply has to stay the course and the others will fall off. Of course, that still leaves Bernie Sanders.

J