Election 2020

[Teenwolf]

Here's one thing you continue to avoid -- he garnered 43% of the Dem vote in the 2016 primaries. He's now polling in these "bullshit" polls at almost 2/3rds less than that. What's going on? Why has he lost so much momentum among Democrats? His story and issues haven't changed a bit. Where have his voters gone? Maybe Dem voters are so turned off by the 2016 election that they are throwing out anyone associated with it. Maybe his story is old and tiresome. Maybe Dem voters already know it didn't work in '16, that he came up short and they don't want to back another losing horse. Maybe Dem voters know the issues are not as important with a retaliatory GOP Senate unwilling to pass any Dem-backed legislation anyway.

Biden clearly isn't the freshest face on the block, but until further notice, he's the best shot at ousting the madman in the Oval Office. And right now, despite all your angry bluster, these bullshit polls show HE, and NOT Bernie, are not just competing with but BEATING Trump in critical battleground states.

Right, Hillary 1.0 worked out so well, let's run another uninspiring centrist with a truckload of negative baggage. Whatever dude.

I've given plenty of reasons as to why these polls are flawed. You just keep posting them. I give up. Keep believing the polls like in '16. It worked out so well then.

[DMT]

TW, I don't see why you continue attacking Revo for posting polling updates. He's not an anti-Bernie guy and has said he'd vote for him if he wins the primary. It's telling how you responded to the video of Bernie looking silly. For all his strengths, Bernie can be rigid and repetitive in his oratory and that is exactly what was funny about the segment. As for the anti-drug clips, no one was viewing it as a "gotcha" except you.

[revo]

Right, Hillary 1.0 worked out so well, let's run another uninspiring centrist with a truckload of negative baggage. Whatever dude.

I've given plenty of reasons as to why these polls are flawed. You just keep posting them. I give up. Keep believing the polls like in '16. It worked out so well then.

Because you showed that one poll had 450 Dems voting and needed 150 to get an answer, you toss every single poll out there? Wowza.

Sorry man, these "flawed polls" will tell many of these "uninspiring" candidates that they have no shot whatsoever. The polls weren't wrong in 2016 -- they had Hillary winning the popular vote, no? That's why these STATE polls are so important. What good is seeing Bernie ahead of Trump nationally, but behind him in nearly every battleground state?

And Bernie 1.0 also worked out very well, eh?

What's the answer as to why Bernie's bandwagon has lost so many followers? You didn't answer that.

[B-Fly]

Here's one thing you continue to avoid -- he garnered 43% of the Dem vote in the 2016 primaries. He's now polling in these "bullshit" polls at almost 2/3rds less than that. What's going on? Why has he lost so much momentum among Democrats? His story and issues haven't changed a bit. Where have his voters gone? Maybe Dem voters are so turned off by the 2016 election that they are throwing out anyone associated with it. Maybe his story is old and tiresome. Maybe Dem voters already know it didn't work in '16, that he came up short and they don't want to back another losing horse. Maybe Dem voters know the issues are not as important with a retaliatory GOP Senate unwilling to pass any Dem-backed legislation anyway.

Biden clearly isn't the freshest face on the block, but until further notice, he's the best shot at ousting the madman in the Oval Office. And right now, despite all your angry bluster, these bullshit polls show HE, and NOT Bernie, are not just competing with but BEATING Trump in critical battleground states.

I don't think "Why has he lost so much momentum?" is a fair question, honestly. He got to 43% of the vote because the race narrowed to Hillary and Bernie. Some of those votes were "I really like Bernie Sanders" and some of those votes were "I really don't like Hillary Clinton". Now, with 20+ candidates, we don't know from the polls whether Biden is essentially 2020's Hillary Clinton, and thus whether the natural winnowing of the field would spill their respective supporters toward Sanders as the "fresher" alternative. Right now there are plenty of people who still would prefer one of the many candidates who is not a white, male, septuagenarian. But where will they go if and when the race narrows to Biden or Sanders. I suspect if you ran a poll with just those two options, Sanders would be right back at 43% or maybe even a bit better.

[Steve 2.0]

I don't think "Why has he lost so much momentum?" is a fair question, honestly. He got to 43% of the vote because the race narrowed to Hillary and Bernie. Some of those votes were "I really like Bernie Sanders" and some of those votes were "I really don't like Hillary Clinton". Now, with 20+ candidates, we don't know from the polls whether Biden is essentially 2020's Hillary Clinton, and thus whether the natural winnowing of the field would spill their respective supporters toward Sanders as the "fresher" alternative. Right now there are plenty of people who still would prefer one of the many candidates who is not a white, male, septuagenarian. But where will they go if and when the race narrows to Biden or Sanders. I suspect if you ran a poll with just those two options, Sanders would be right back at 43% or maybe even a bit better.

I'd vote for you, Brian. Please run.

[In the Corn]

Right, Hillary 1.0 worked out so well, let's run another uninspiring centrist with a truckload of negative baggage. Whatever dude.

I've given plenty of reasons as to why these polls are flawed. You just keep posting them. I give up. Keep believing the polls like in '16. It worked out so well then.

One advantage Biden has is the attachment to Obama. Hillary, while serving for Obama, was more hitched to the Bill than Obama.

Biden gets the Obama love that Hillary never really got, or IMO, wanted.

[revo]

I don't think "Why has he lost so much momentum?" is a fair question, honestly. He got to 43% of the vote because the race narrowed to Hillary and Bernie. Some of those votes were "I really like Bernie Sanders" and some of those votes were "I really don't like Hillary Clinton". Now, with 20+ candidates, we don't know from the polls whether Biden is essentially 2020's Hillary Clinton, and thus whether the natural winnowing of the field would spill their respective supporters toward Sanders as the "fresher" alternative. Right now there are plenty of people who still would prefer one of the many candidates who is not a white, male, septuagenarian. But where will they go if and when the race narrows to Biden or Sanders. I suspect if you ran a poll with just those two options, Sanders would be right back at 43% or maybe even a bit better.

I get that, but if Biden is the Hillary here -- veteran of Presidential politics, from the Obama/Clinton chain -- then what is Sanders? Was he just the anti-Hillary candidate in 2016? Why did Biden instantly assume the favorite's role now, and not Sanders?

So I'll disagree. If Sanders' momentum carried, he shouldn't be the guy now who gains only if the others drop out, but he should have had a larger vote share from the get-go. Obviously, whoever is the last candidate standing vs. Biden (assuming he's the one) will also see a huge increase in votes as the anti-establishment vote. Is that solely what Sanders was in 2016?

[onejayhawk]

The issue with both Biden and Bernie is the amount of history on video. That stuff will start showing up in commercials and social sites. While he's ahead now, I expect Biden will be brought back to the field. It isn't like either of them can beat Trump. Mayor Pete either, but he is the guy who might make a serious run in 2024.

J

[Teenwolf]

Bernie makes the same point I have made when "confronted with a polling defecit". He responded, "I've looked at that poll, and it includes over 2/3 of voters over the age of 50, and that's not accurate."

Do you forget Bernie crushing the polling numbers throughout the last primary? Remember when polls showed Bernie down nearly 10 pts in Indiana, where he won? Polls were garbage last time, still garbage.

From an article about Bernie's "shocking" Indiana win:

"Despite trailing by an average of seven points in opinion polls and losing a string of bigger, more diverse states on the east coast, Sanders once again proved his appeal to disaffected midwest voters by pulling off his 18th victory of 2016, according to Associated Press projections."

[Teenwolf]

I love Bernie's chances in the midwest. This video about John Deere screwing over farmers seems like a big winner. Seems insane that farmers don't have the legal right to repair or retrofit equipment that they're paying over $100K for. As a small business owner, I find that concept really terrible, anti-Democratic, really. Libertarians will love this type of pitch.

[Teenwolf]

What do the banking industry folks here think of Bernie and AOC introducing legislation to limit credit card interest to 15% and kill the predatory payday lender industry by re-introducing postal service banking? I'm curious to hear from Bernie Brewer and Revo especially.

Second question: do you think voters will prefer Bernie's message on debt enslavement, or Biden's history as the Delaware banking industry stooge? Hmm, I guess we shall wait and see, eh? I like Bernie's chances.

[Judge Jude]

https://reason.com/2019/05/09/bernie-sanders-ocasio-cortez-credit-cards-poor-payday-loans/

not sure what to think of the issue, but that article is food for thought, at least.

"The Postal Service lost nearly $4 billion in the 2018 fiscal year, an increase of nearly 44 percent from the prior year. Even before then, the Government Accountability Office, which sometimes seems to exist mainly to document how other parts of the government are failing, warned that a "comprehensive package of actions is needed to improve USPS financial viability." This is a polite way of saying that it can't meet its obligations, and needs a bailout to survive. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, in other words, would push people into a financial relationship with a failing institution that has deep fiscal problems. Somehow, this is supposed to be an improvement."

[nots]

I love Bernie's chances in the midwest. This video about John Deere screwing over farmers seems like a big winner. Seems insane that farmers don't have the legal right to repair or retrofit equipment that they're paying over $100K for. As a small business owner, I find that concept really terrible, anti-Democratic, really. Libertarians will love this type of pitch.

My dad hates John Deere more than almost any person, place or thing. Once gave me a lecture because my son was playing with a plastic toy John Deere tractor, lol.

[revo]

What do the banking industry folks here think of Bernie and AOC introducing legislation to limit credit card interest to 15% and kill the predatory payday lender industry by re-introducing postal service banking? I'm curious to hear from Bernie Brewer and Revo especially.

I've never worked in a bank dealing with retail customers, but I did work in fixed income, especially high yield ("junk") bonds, for many years at a couple of white shoe bond managers in the 90s and 00s. A junk bond, of course, is a bond issued by a company or municipality that needs money now, but because they have poor credit due to whatever circumstance, they will only attract investors ("lenders") by issuing the bonds with a very high interest rate. That's the tradeoff -- an investor receives a higher than market yield to offset the risk of a default. Our analysts would put in a lot of work to determine if the risk was worth it, and they usually found the ones that were, which made it a good investment.

With credit cards, it's the same thing, but much worse, because the card issuers are dealing with the general public and can only do so much research on an individual. They need to make a determination on each case based on credit score and delinquency history. Never been late on a payment, or gone to collection, or filed for bankruptcy, and have a great credit score? You'll get a high credit amount with a low rate. Always late on payments, have a high balance outstanding with a lower income, and a poor credit score? You'll get a lower credit amount with a higher rate, because the delinquency risk is extreme.

But assume the guy in the video is accurate and sans any "deals" a typical low risk customer gets a rate of 15%, then if it's capped at that level, the low risk customer and the high risk customer pay the same rate? That doesn't make any sense to me.

What would likely happen if the credit rate was capped is the card issuers would refuse to take on potential customers with a very high risk rate, so they simply wouldn't get credit extended at all.

I don't have delinquency rate stats for credit card issuers, but I assume the lower the credit score, the much higher the delinquency rate, so if forced, the credit issuers would just deny them credit.

[fuhrdog]

I love Bernie's chances in the midwest.

If he wants to beat Trump in Iowa, he better love guns and he better want immigrants out. Not my position but the vast majority of people I know or deal with.