Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place (10 Viewers)
- Thread starter Sinn Fein
- Start date
timschochet
Footballguy
I would think so, yeah.
If Bernie stays in, and divides the progressive vote, Biden is likely to win more states. As he does, his campaign will grow stronger and attract more voters, leading to more delegates. So yeah.
There seems to be a reluctance here to agree that anything benefits Joe Biden at all. Yet he's still very likely to be the nominee. Sorry that this seems to make so many of you guys so unhappy.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
So your argument is that there may be some states where Biden wins a plurality of votes if Bernie is in the race, and that voters in other states will therefore be more inclined to support Biden as a result? I thought you said "this isn't complicated." It's very complicated and very speculative.
caustic
Footballguy
Morning Consult polls second choices, and Biden is the second choice for a plurality of Bernie supporters.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
Sanders will not quit his campaign before the convention because it's his final relevance; because, since he became the thorn in the Dem's side chasing Hillary he's become as addicted to his process as the President is to his and because he believes himself to be the conscience of the Party and pre-absolved for whatever he says since virtually everything he was clamoring about and being called crazy for four years ago are now significant planks in the Democratic platform.
New Hampshire Polling:
Warren - 25%
Biden - 24%
Sanders - 11%
Buttigieg - 10%
Harris - 5%
Gabbard - 3%
Klobuchar - 3%
https://www.wmur.com/article/warren-biden-in-virtual-dead-heat-in-saint-anselm-college-poll-of-nh-primary-voters/29328245
Warren - 25%
Biden - 24%
Sanders - 11%
Buttigieg - 10%
Harris - 5%
Gabbard - 3%
Klobuchar - 3%
https://www.wmur.com/article/warren-biden-in-virtual-dead-heat-in-saint-anselm-college-poll-of-nh-primary-voters/29328245
Sanders: $25.3 million
Buttigieg: $19.1 million
Harris: $11.6 million
Booker: $6 million
Its not a terrible number for Harris, and I don't know how much cash she was able to move over from her senate campaign, but she is needs a real big Q4 in terms of support.
I think the expectations are that Warren will post a big number in the Bernie range, and then there is BIden. One quote from his campaign: "What a Biden campaign official did tell me of Q3 fundraising was: "The issue here is whether you have enough money to run your race. We unequivocally do." Read into that what you will."
Adding Yang
Yang puts up a good number - and really highlights the difficulty that Booker is in (and probably Klobuchar).
I think we are still waiting on Biden and Warren.
Of course, the bigger (more important) numbers will come with the actual FEC filings later this month - how much cash on hand. In that regard, the senators have a slight *big?) advantage in that they can move money over from Senate re-election funds - so their cash on hand may put them in a better position that simply looking at cash raised.
timschochet
Footballguy
Terrible news about Bernie.i hope he is better soon.
But- I don’t think it’s in poor taste to discuss in this thread the implications if Bernie is either sidelined for a long while or forced to leave the race: IMO, either scenario would make Liz Warren a prohibitive favorite.
But- I don’t think it’s in poor taste to discuss in this thread the implications if Bernie is either sidelined for a long while or forced to leave the race: IMO, either scenario would make Liz Warren a prohibitive favorite.
I agree - but I also think she is a prohibitive favorite right now.timschochet said:
Bernie's camp says the ad-buy is not a cancellation, but a postponement. And, on a certain level, that makes sense - you want to coordinate an ad-buy around a candidate's activities. But, aside from the fact that I thought Bernie was limited before this incident - I see absolutely no way for him to go on and get the nomination as a 78-yo, with a heart problem - even minor.
For Biden - I think Bernie's issues will cut both ways. On one hand, he is the obvious current foil for Warren - and nobody really wants a candidate winning by default - so people could stick with Biden a little longer than they would have otherwise. On the other hand - Bernie's health scare, will also serve as a reminder of Biden's own age - and potential for health issues. And, that may hasten voters to move to a younger candidate (albeit Warren is not exactly "young").
Last edited by a moderator:
Mystery Achiever
Footballguy
Warren's one-day gains is pretty close to the sum of Biden+Sanders; losses. It's a shame we have to have a twelve person debate when it seems to be a three person race.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
i was back in the box dealing poker on Saturday night after a Wednesday angioplasty. Bernie wont miss a beat
Mister CIA
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Let’s get back to the main issue of this thread.
The RNC wants to run against Liz Warren. I believe Trump wants to run against Liz Warren. I wrote a few months back that Trump will lose the election for sure unless the Democratic nominee is either Liz Warren or Bernie Sanders; then it’s up in the air. I believe that even more firmly now.
The Democrats are putting themselves in a trap here and it frustrates me to no end. Why are so many of them insisting on rolling the dice with Warren if Biden is a sure thing? And if Biden is not to your taste, then Buttigieg, or Harris, Booker or Klobuchar- anybody but the socialists? If we do this we’re giving Trump a chance to win despite everything, because he and the Republicans will focus solely on her large scale ideas and try to scare the public. And they might succeed.
The RNC wants to run against Liz Warren. I believe Trump wants to run against Liz Warren. I wrote a few months back that Trump will lose the election for sure unless the Democratic nominee is either Liz Warren or Bernie Sanders; then it’s up in the air. I believe that even more firmly now.
The Democrats are putting themselves in a trap here and it frustrates me to no end. Why are so many of them insisting on rolling the dice with Warren if Biden is a sure thing? And if Biden is not to your taste, then Buttigieg, or Harris, Booker or Klobuchar- anybody but the socialists? If we do this we’re giving Trump a chance to win despite everything, because he and the Republicans will focus solely on her large scale ideas and try to scare the public. And they might succeed.
The Commish
Footballguy
Do you think that Buttigieg, Harris, Booker or Klobuchar aren't going to be "the socialist" in this little play should they get the starring role?
timschochet
Footballguy
He will make that play with everyone, including Biden whom you did not mention. But that’s not the point. The point is, I think that with Warren or Sanders Trump will have the chance of succeeding at it. With the others he won’t.
Lets be honest Tim - you were certain Trump (or any GOP candidate) would only lose to Clinton last cycle...
The Commish
Footballguy
Why? Either the American people are smart enough to understand what he's attempting to do or they aren't...especially when ANY of them bring up the current "socialist" positions like the tariffs and relief payments to the farmers etc.
timschochet
Footballguy
I wish you would stop repeating this because it simply isn’t true. I feared Trump, feared that he would win. I thought the odds were against it but that it was closer than a lot of people thought and I consistently wrote that he had a decent shot.
Doesn’t matter; in the past I’ve been wrong about elections about as much as I’ve been right, but it has no relevance to this current argument.
timschochet
Footballguy
Because a lot of independents and conservatives who don’t like Trump are scared of Warren’s proposals.
timschochet
Footballguy
Just to be clear- I am not predicting that Warren, if she is the nominee, will lose to Trump. She could easily win and there are lots of reasons to think she will.
What I’m saying is it’s an unnecessary risk. I think most of the others are sure things; she isn’t.
What I’m saying is it’s an unnecessary risk. I think most of the others are sure things; she isn’t.
Last edited by a moderator:
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
I'll answer you. Warren is pretty close to my dream candidate. The chances of getting someone like her elected President, in a normal election, aren't great. But because the GOP is a disaster right now, I actually think her chances are very good to win. Maybe they're slightly less good than a few other Dems, but I'm not really all that certain of that, and in any case those candidates are less desirable to me. I'm willing to "roll the dice" because Warren is worth it.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
toshiba
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
If these people actually KNOW the policy proposals in any detail, they also know the likelihood of them being passed in today's political climate. It seemed like you were talking about the uninformed being scared by the term "socialist". That's the more legit concern as I see it....way more people in that group than the "informed independent/conservatives who don't like Trump" group. IMO, that group has already made up their minds.
toshiba
Footballguy
I remember when a majority of Americans were afraid of "the gays" too. I think a majority Americans got over that really quick once policies started being enacted.
Marauder
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Nope. The ones I don’t like will never get passed. But even if they did I’m not scared of them. I disagree with them but if they pass somehow I will be optimistic and hopeful.
Marauder
Footballguy
Then why do you think other people will be? People making decisions on who to support because they think other people will think a certain way kind of drives me nuts. I don't think you are giving other people enough credit. We, as humans, are generally not very good at predicting what other people are going to think. If everybody just voted for the candidate they think will make the best President that would give us the best chance of ending up with the best nominee.
Biden isn’t a sure thing.
Buttigieg, Booker, or Klobuchar would be great. I’d prefer all of them to Biden, Warren, or Harris.
But Warren is expressly not a socialist. It’s weird for you to describe her that way.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure it does. You should have very little confidence in your belief that Biden is more electable than Warren. Electability is difficult to predict, only a very few savants may actually be reliably good at it (if anybody at all is), and your track record suggests that you are not one of those very few savants.
You think Biden is a sure thing in the general, but you also thought he was a sure thing in the primary. Maybe you should be skeptical of your ability to evaluate sure things in electoral politics.
Last edited by a moderator:
Drunken Cowboy
Footballguy
I think before the phone call with Ukraine amplified the old debunct story about Biden, he was the most electable. However, now I don't think that is true. I continue to worry about some electability issues with Warren, but all of them are unfair and I think she would be a good president.
timschochet
Footballguy
I think that others will be afraid of Warren because most Americans regardless of political leanings, seem to believe that the President has far more power to enact economic and social change than they actually do. This is a flaw in our national thinking, and it causes people to argue over positions of candidates which in truth are irrelevant because it’s just not going to happen. An example: Warren is one of several candidates who wants to get rid of the electoral college. Is this a good idea? A bad one? Doesn’t matter because if she’s elected it’s not going to happen.
timschochet
Footballguy
Bernie is a Democratic socialist. Warren shares most of Bernie’s views. I believe that the Republicans will have success describing her as a socialist, whether the term is accurate or not.
timschochet
Footballguy
Normally I would agree with this analysis, as cutting as it is to me, lol.
But this election is different, unique, because of Donald Trump. By all rights this election should be a referendum on Donald Trump’s 1st term, which is why he should lose to just about anyone. But because Liz Warren’s proposals are going to be regarded, by at least a significant part of the population, as far removed from the mainstream status quo, there is the risk that the election will become a referendum on those proposals rather than Trump. This is also true of Bernie but not of any other of the candidates.
Therefore Warren and Bernie are unnecessary risks IMO.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
A this point, I'm thinking Buttigieg is going to pull this thing off.
Mister CIA
Footballguy
I think you're opinion is fueled by what I consider to be propaganda, where people who will absolutely vote for Trump like to tease the possibility that they will vote for a Democrat if it's someone "reasonable."
Exhibit A: Russian trolls (and sympathizers) who prop up the likes of Tulsi Gabbard and Marianne Williamson in online polls.
I cannot conceive of anything Warren (or any other Democratic candidate with a realistic shot) could say or do that would make me cast a vote for Trump.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mister CIA
Footballguy
I can see the race quickly getting reduced to Warren, Biden, and Buttigieg. I think Warren prevails, but I would not be surprised at all if he were picked to be the VP candidate. In fact, I've got $5 that says this is exactly how it plays out.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Because I want Trump to be the "disjunctive" president that finally ends the era started with Reagan. A fatally flawed era which has set America back.
I don't want Trump to be just an "affiliated" presidency. Biden, absent some type of crisis that forces his hands would make that the case as Biden would just be another "pre-emptive" president in the Reagan line.
There were times around the beginning of Obama's second term where he was spoken of as the next "transformative" (or "reconstructive") president, times during his first campaign where he seeked that role, but I think he settled in as just another from the opposition party in the Reagan line. Warren might be just the same as Obama in the end, but at least there is hope that we can finally stick a fork into this failed experiment of the conservative revolution. It is overdue!
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m aware of this stunt, but I also think that there are enough people who truly feel this way to have a chance to swing the election.
timschochet
Footballguy
I can respect this POV like the one earlier by fatguy.
Yet I think both of you are making the error I referred to earlier: giving the President way too much power. Unless Warren is able to bring in a wave of progressives with her in House and Senate (very doubtful) she’s not going to be able to cause near enough change to stick the fork in that you want.
Similar threads
