Current Affairs 2020 Democratic Primary

[abelard]

It's worth remembering that California has moved it's primary from June to March

Right, good spot.

at best I can see sanders coming in third there behind Biden and Harris.

With the obvious caveats that is far too early to be thinking about polls, and that they are less reliable than ever (for reasons which tend to favour Sanders), he is nonetheless leading the pack in the two most recent polls in California, and ahead of Harris in the latest three ; )

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primaries/democratic/california/

California is also one of the most challenging states for him.

Unlike any other candidate, he will at minimum be equally competitive in every other state (and, more realistically, he'll win more states than anyone).

I strongly doubt that Biden's apparent support will hold. He is 2020's ¡Jeb!

 

[Ruairi77]

I strongly doubt that Biden's apparent support will hold. He is 2020's ¡Jeb!

ha, yea I was listening to the radio thismorning and Jeb sprang to mind.
Running over old ground here but I've definitely had chats with people who will vote for Biden because he's 'the adult in the room'. And he can win Pennsylvania and the other rust belt states, but the unions, and on and on.
I fear that a Biden nomination would lead to similar apathy that Clinton suffered from.
I hope he does a Jeb but I fear he wont. I fully expect him to be right up there come Iowa.

 

[LinekersLegs]

It is interesting that Warren is portrayed as being far more specific and detail-oriented on health care than Sanders, because as far as I can make out, the opposite is true. I suspect this is yet another case of the media filling in the gaps for us.

Look at her campaign website, for example - can you even find the word 'healthcare'? I can't.

It may well be that her policy is in the process of development, which is fine, but for now it is simply not true that she has the more developed healthcare plan; in fact, when pressed for details, she has so far been very cagey on what she actually stands for.

Sanders, on the other hand, has by far the most detailed healthcare proposal of any of the confirmed contenders, a 100 page preliminary bill which Warren herself has endorsed (!) along with Harris, Booker, Gillibrand...

So... when we assert that one candidate is smarter or more prepared than another, we should be careful that we aren't just parroting back what we have been conditioned to believe about them. That's not to single anyone out, by the way... I can be as prone to it as anyone.

I agree that Warren hasn't been particularly specific on healthcare - as you point out she has often dodged the question. But she seems to be getting more of a pass because of her multiple other detailed policy proposals that she does a good job of communicating. That "she has a plan" might be an entirely unearned reputation when expanded to healthcare, and the media helping fill in the gaps, but it doesn't mean that the perception isn't there.

Healthcare is an extraordinarily complex area but because of that, and how important it is to people's lives (literally life and death in some cases) it is fairly natural for people to want details. There is also probably a higher skepticism to a "trust me you can keep your doctor" message as that is what Obama famously said and it didn't turn out to be the case with Obamacare - once bitten, twice shy and all that.

What I am trying to convey is that, whilst I think Sanders is doing a very good job of talking to people who don't like the Democratic party/independants etc who will vote in the general election, he doesn't seem to be addressing some sections of the dem primary (at least not my bubble anyway) - hence the question on whether you saw any comparison to Clinton's complacency. I'm seeing the same thing that @Ruairi77 is, that Sanders doesn't seem to be gaining any new followers in a primary he lost the last time - it might be our bubbles and it might be different this time but we are just relaying what we personally see.

To each their own. I think the mostly invented kerfuffle over Did-Not-Release-His-Tax-Returns-Quite-As-Promptly-As-The-Media-Demanded-Gate predictably juvenile and absurd, and... to put it mildly, not remotely comparable to knowingly (and probably illegally) deleting over 30,000 emails of public interest. Certainly, in another week, nobody will still remember it.

And I'm not sure that's a fair characterisation of what's he's said about his book either.

As you say we'll have to agree to disagree on this one - if you bang on about how full transparency in others is so important you are better walking the talk early on and it is an unnecessary own goal if you don't.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/09/us/politics/bernie-sanders-millionaire-net-worth-taxes.html
Reminded that he is a millionaire, he did not shirk from the description.“I wrote a best-selling book,” he declared. “If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.”

Thankfully he seems to have dropped that line when he has been asked about it since.

On that note, one can see the contrived media 'gotcha' coming a mile away, and it is all so dreary, and pathetic, and stupid. Senators and Representatives are paid $175,000 per year. Sanders has been in Congress for almost 30 years. The most basic maths tell us that is beyond obvious that he has earned over a million in net worth even without the book. This is an attempt to invoke the same idiotic logic that we see from the usual suspects on the Climate Change thread: "Have you ever consumed so much as a kilogram of Carbon? Ohhhhhhhh you therefore have no right to suggest we do something to stop climate change!!! GOTCHA!!!!!! (PS: I am Very Smart!!!!)"

One does not need an invented clickbait-invoking media controversy to know that virtually all of the candidates from both parties are millionaires; the more important question, which conspicuously never gets asked, is what any of them plan to do about it.

The difference this time was not that Sanders is a millionaire in assets (which you'd want everyone at his age to be to be able to retire in some comfort) - it was that he had an Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) of over a million. Yes it is a predictable gotcha - I'm just amazed that Sanders didn't have a better response to such an obvious question.

Likewise, most of the questions at the CNN *Not* A Debate, were just as loaded, and just as childish.

If I were him, I'd have turned the tables, and asked that women why she is attending an event hosted by the DEMOCRATIC!!!! Party , given the deplorable human rights record of the DEMOCRATIC!!!! People's Republic of Korea, because use of the same word obviously demonstrates a correlation. And then I'd use the exchange as an opportunity to point out that just because your parents paid for your Ivy League degree by buying Harvard a new swimming pool and/or croquet pitch, does not mean you are not a credulous f*ucking imbecile. Of course, this is why I am not in politics

lol Yes, probably best stick to the day job! And that goes for all of us keyboard warriors

 

[LinekersLegs]

ha, yea I was listening to the radio thismorning and Jeb sprang to mind.
Running over old ground here but I've definitely had chats with people who will vote for Biden because he's 'the adult in the room'. And he can win Pennsylvania and the other rust belt states, but the unions, and on and on.
I fear that a Biden nomination would lead to similar apathy that Clinton suffered from.
I hope he does a Jeb but I fear he wont. I fully expect him to be right up there come Iowa.

Like you I think Biden is too old and could possibly do a Jeb...but currently would not bet on it. Hence why I am so surprised that Bernie seems very relaxed about exClinton primary voters drifting to Biden.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Not a great sign for a campaign to have such differences before even launching

 

[LinekersLegs]

Anyone watch this? Seen some of the speakers and found it interesting, going to see if can watch it all.

 

[abelard]

Biden: Time to ‘take back’ the country
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-time-to-take-back-the-country/ar-BBW5dIX

Joe Biden said on Thursday that it was time to “take back” the country and treat the middle class with respect, as the former vice president warms up for a likely 2020 presidential run.

“I’m getting so sick and tired of the way everybody’s being treated,” Biden told a crowd of striking union workers here. “We will take back this country. … I mean it. Don’t give up. Keep it going.”

Biden called the middle class a “values set” and railed against Wall Street bankers, CEOs and President Donald Trump’s tax cuts.

“People are busting their necks,” Biden said. “People go out and make a living, people who play by the rules, people who have done everything they’re supposed to do. And people are entitled to be treated with respect and decency and fairness.”

Comcast executive to host Joe Biden fundraiser
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/comcast-executive-to-host-joe-biden-fundraiser/

Comcast's chief lobbyist David Cohen and his wife will be hosting a fundraiser for former Vice President Joe Biden Thursday, on the day he is expected to announce his third candidacy for the presidency.

Unlike many of his competitors, Biden is courting some of the party's traditional high-dollar donors to support his campaign, which is evident from the invitation to the fundraiser, obtained by CBS Philadelphia. The Cohens, along with cohosts who include top lobbyists and lawyers in Pennsylvania, are seeking donations of at least $2,800 to attend the fundraiser, though there is also a "young professional" donation level of $250 included on the invitation.

* * *

Copy + Paste your favourite cliche about the stupidity of Trump supporters 'voting against their own interests', and insert here:

 

[abelard]

hence the question on whether you saw any comparison to Clinton's complacency.

Sorry, missed this. I don't think the campaign is being complacent, or taking anything for granted.

The campaign manager himself recently admitted that they have perhaps a 1 in 3 chance (it might even have been 1 in 4 - can't remember).

But, I think they know that they can't appeal to every potential primary voter, because the voters have very different interests.

People who were die-hard Clinton voters, or who of sound mind actually support Comcast-Biden, are never going to vote for Sanders, and extending unsuccessful olive branches to them would only disillusion his base.

By the looks of it, the campaign is focusing so far on the Midwest, no doubt judging that a coalition of almost everybody under 40 + disaffected postindustrial flyover boomers + people who have ever had to deal with a health insurance company, will suffice.

They are never going to win woke tech oligarchs or wealthy suburban boomers who think Thomas Friedman and Talcum Gladwell are smart, so they (wisely) aren't really going to try - but this is due to pragmatism, not complacency.

 

[LinekersLegs]

By the looks of it, the campaign is focusing so far on the Midwest, no doubt judging that a coalition of almost everybody under 40 + disaffected postindustrial flyover boomers + people who have ever had to deal with a health insurance company, will suffice.

Yeah think you are right about the strategy but believe not trying a tad harder to win over some older women is likely to hurt, especially in the south. Long way go go yet though so guess we’ll see.

 

[Deleted member 48881]

Biden? pff. wasn't he the one who said when asked about Hillary's chance vs Trump: ''Sanders supporters?, meh, they will vote for Hillary in the end, they have no choice'' terrible candidate.

Sanders or Gabbard for me.

 

[Ruairi77]

On Sanders, I'm not sure he faced any real opposition in the 16 primaries. Yea, the DNC's behaviour was terrible but Clinton actually went easy on him for fear of driving his voters in to the arms of Stein.
It'll be completely different this time around.
I watched some highlites of ShethePeople last night and he didn't do well, the audience were audibly groaning when he couldn't move past his usual talking points. Warren and Booker seemed to do well.

 

[abelard]

Biden? pff. wasn't he the one who said when asked about Hillary's chance vs Trump: ''Sanders supporters?, meh, they will vote for Hillary in the end, they have no choice'' terrible candidate.

Sanders or Gabbard for me.

Yes, Biden is a singularly atrocious candidate, especially in the current context.

It would be astonishing for him to get the nomination, if it weren't the Democratic Party that we're dealing with.

Apart from the Russian sleeper agent revelries, he negates almost every line of attack the Democrats have deployed against Trump: He is likewise a lecherous out-of-touch corporate whore with a long and detailed track record of race-baiting, warmongering, and corruption.

Imagine portraying yourself as the Party that protects minorities, then choosing the man who delivered Strom Thurmond's eulogy as your emblem.

We really should not even need to be having this discussion... but as I say, it's the Democratic Party.

He is also staggeringly lazy about even the most basic mechanics of running a political campaign, and thus, has no money whatsoever, which effectively guarantees a campaign entirely dependent on corporate bribery.

On the other hand, it is also very likely that his polling numbers are hollow, based on people who don't follow politics but who are vaguely familiar with him because the television has spent the past four decades telling them how much they like him.

He's political souffle, which is why, unlike in 2016 when a perfunctory coronation seemed certain, there are now 20+ rivals vying for the coveted role of Official Bernie Dragonslayer.

 

[abelard]

but Clinton actually went easy on him for fear of driving his voters in to the arms of Stein.

lollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollol

Cheers mate, that made my day

 

[Ruairi77]

lollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollollol

Cheers mate, that made my day

you think Clinton gave him a tough time in the primaries?
Why would she? I'm not saying she was doing him a favor, it's just normal tactics of a two horse primary race.
Those tactics go out the window in a field of 20 and Sanders will face tougher scrutiny.
Glad you're amused!

 

[LinekersLegs]

I watched some highlites of ShethePeople last night and he didn't do well, the audience were audibly groaning when he couldn't move past his usual talking points. Warren and Booker seemed to do well.

The groans at Sanders MLK reference in particular were quite surprising although he did do much better than Gabbard


Castro was well received as was, somewhat to my surprise, Harris whose poor criminal justice history I thought would have more impact. Warren leaning hard into “I have a plan”.