Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sinn Fein

2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gopher State said:

CA values will kill any presidential candidate 

I'm pretty sure CA values money most.  Can you elaborate to the contrary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, OrtonToOlsen said:

But they’re pretty good for California.

You’re on fire tonight. Stay safe 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sinn Fein said:

You’re on fire tonight. Stay safe 

Not me.  Wildfires are no joke but the overwhelming majority of Californians never have to deal with them.

Although, I am afraid that since Gov Newsom took my guns I won’t be able to shoot any fires that try to attack my home.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie continues to poll very well. 

If Bernie had quit the race after his heart attack, wouldn’t Warren be the commanding favorite right now? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Bernie continues to poll very well. 

If Bernie had quit the race after his heart attack, wouldn’t Warren be the commanding favorite right now? 

I think Bernie has a real shot.  But DNC will almost certainly neuter him somehow again if he gains too much momentum.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, timschochet said:

Bernie continues to poll very well. 

If Bernie had quit the race after his heart attack, wouldn’t Warren be the commanding favorite right now? 

Probably but that’s no different than if Biden or Pete dropped out.  I’m curious to see how things shift over the upcoming weeks as Booker, Castro, Harris and probably Klobuchar drop out.  I see all of them as more centrist and while none of them have great numbers if all of their supporters go to Biden or Pete, I think it makes that candidate the short term favorite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hugh Jass said:

Now THIS is a scary poll at a year out from the election.  The battleground states.  One poll, but good God, nominate someone to get this guy out of there, please.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/upshot/one-year-from-election-trump-trails-biden-but-leads-warren-in-battlegrounds.html

The key here IMO is not Warren’s overall positions or personal appeal, but very specifically Medicare for All. And it’s not the threat of a middle class tax increase which Warren attempted to put to bed this weekend. It’s that a lot of people are satisfied with the insurance plans they have and don’t want to see them replaced. And this includes a lot of union workers in the swing states who negotiated their insurance as part of their contracts- these folks, who normally vote Democrat, really don’t want Medicare for All. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hugh Jass said:

Now THIS is a scary poll at a year out from the election.  The battleground states.  One poll, but good God, nominate someone to get this guy out of there, please.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/upshot/one-year-from-election-trump-trails-biden-but-leads-warren-in-battlegrounds.html

Spending 2 years talking about Russia to remove him from office, then moving onto impeachment to remove him from office hasn't done much to convince voters that the Democratic nominee is a better alternative, or represents a meaningful improvement to their lives.  I wonder why that is.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, timschochet said:

Bernie continues to poll very well. 

If Bernie had quit the race after his heart attack, wouldn’t Warren be the commanding favorite right now? 

 

14 hours ago, zoonation said:

I think Bernie has a real shot.  But DNC will almost certainly neuter him somehow again if he gains too much momentum.   

Bernie's 15-20% is locked-in like Trump's 40-45%. They both benefited from the ABCs in 2016. Sanders hasn't got the anyone-but vote this time and ain't going nowhere. No wax, no wane. Since this is his last relevance, however, he'll go to the end as the conscience of the Party.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hugh Jass said:

Now THIS is a scary poll at a year out from the election.  The battleground states.  One poll, but good God, nominate someone to get this guy out of there, please.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/upshot/one-year-from-election-trump-trails-biden-but-leads-warren-in-battlegrounds.html

That’s horrifying. The EC is such an enormous advantage for the GOP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, caustic said:

That’s horrifying. The EC is such an enormous advantage for the GOP.

But isn’t that what the founders intended? They didn’t have the current GOP in mind of course, but it seems to me that they wanted to protect rural areas which might be outvoted by big cities. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, timschochet said:

The key here IMO is not Warren’s overall positions or personal appeal, but very specifically Medicare for All. And it’s not the threat of a middle class tax increase which Warren attempted to put to bed this weekend. It’s that a lot of people are satisfied with the insurance plans they have and don’t want to see them replaced. And this includes a lot of union workers in the swing states who negotiated their insurance as part of their contracts- these folks, who normally vote Democrat, really don’t want Medicare for All. 

Disagree with this. Bernie and Warren are both proponents of M4A (and I'd argue that Bernie is a more passionate one than Warren), but for some reason Bernie keeps doing better in general election polls. Very odd! https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/upshot/one-year-from-election-trump-trails-biden-but-leads-warren-in-battlegrounds.html

Quote

Elysha Savarese, 26, works in victims advocacy in Florida. She voted for Mr. Trump and said she would not do so again. But she wouldn't vote for Ms. Warren, either:

"There's just something about her that I don't like," she said. "I just don't feel like she's a genuine candidate. I find her body language to be very off-putting. She's very cold. She's basically a Hillary Clinton clone."

As for female presidential candidates in general, she said, "They're super unlikable."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anti-Warren sentiments:

1) Nagging Wife Syndrome - Hillary Carryover Division

2) Will crash the Dow

3) M4A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, caustic said:

Disagree with this. Bernie and Warren are both proponents of M4A (and I'd argue that Bernie is a more passionate one than Warren), but for some reason Bernie keeps doing better in general election polls. Very odd! https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/upshot/one-year-from-election-trump-trails-biden-but-leads-warren-in-battlegrounds.html

 

If she can't vote for women in general, then hopefully she's an outlier. Unless you're suggesting that a woman simply can't be elected President?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, timschochet said:

If she can't vote for women in general, then hopefully she's an outlier. Unless you're suggesting that a woman simply can't be elected President?

Not necessarily, my point is that you can’t just chalk up Warren’s poor performance in general election polls to her support of M4A because another pro-M4A candidate consistently polls better than her in most states. I think that gap is probably a gender penalty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, caustic said:

Not necessarily, my point is that you can’t just chalk up Warren’s poor performance in general election polls to her support of M4A because another pro-M4A candidate consistently polls better than her in most states. I think that gap is probably a gender penalty. 

The number of people who would never vote for a woman to be President is still shockingly high. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Castro is the next candidate to lay off staff. He is shutting down his New Hampshire and South Carolina operations completely, to focus on Iowa and Nevada. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2019 at 10:49 AM, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

If we can have the 99% united against the 1%, that's much closer to united than we have now.

like 20% think they are in the 1%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The primary combatants are beginning to circle each other in anticipation of battle:

Pete Buttigieg has his sights set on Elizabeth Warren in Iowa

Buttigieg spent much of his time on his three-day, 330-plus mile bus tour through northern Iowa preaching the need for unity, drawing a not-so-subtle contrast with Warren's focus on fighting. It's a new strategy that exemplifies the belief inside the Buttigieg campaign that Warren -- whose growing and powerful campaign in the state is seen by Iowa operatives as outflanking former Vice President Joe Biden or Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders -- is the biggest obstacle the South Bend, Indiana, mayor faces over finishing first in Iowa.

Buttigieg, in both conversations with reporters and voters, argued that Warren's message is divisive, questioned the impact that calls for "purity" will have on both the race for the White House and Congress and decried her "my way or the highway approach." He denied that he is overlooking Biden and Sanders -- calling them "formidable" in the state -- but spent far more time this weekend subtly contrasting himself to the Massachusetts senator.

Warren, who also spent the weekend in Iowa, was not mum on this new dynamic, either. She added new lines to her stump speech that accused other nameless Democrats of "running a vague campaign that nibbles around the edges" and trying to "make yourself sound very sophisticated, very smart" by giving up "on big ideas."

This clash has been building for weeks -- and played out on national television during the Democratic debate in October -- but this past weekend in the Hawkeye State could provide a preview of how the final three months of the campaign will play out in Iowa.

"Fighting is not enough," Buttigieg said as his bus rolled between Waverly and Charles City. "And if we get so absorbed in the fighting that it is as though fighting were the purpose, that's where I think we really get in trouble. If you win the fight, then what?"

This -- and a series of other lines Buttigieg worked into his weekend speeches -- directly contrasts Warren.

When asked about Buttigieg's strategy, Warren's campaign honed in on its own.

"Since the beginning we've been solely focused on calling out the corruption, presenting our plans to fix it, and building a grassroots movement in Iowa and across the country to get it done. We're running a positive campaign committed to listening and organizing -- regardless of pundit chatter or process stories," Jason Noble, Warren's Iowa spokesman, told CNN.

***

Sarah Zbornik stood at Buttigieg's rally in Decorah with her sister, Sue Zbornik, and sister-in-law, Carol Zbornik.

All three women are deciding between Buttigieg and Warren.

"Honestly, it is who is going to be able to beat Trump. I will decide on caucus night," said Sarah, who was concerned about Buttigieg's experience and believes Warren may be more prepared on day one.

Sue had a different reaction to the town hall.

"I like her a lot," she said, "but I'm definitely, after tonight, leaning more towards Pete."

It was a common refrain throughout the trip. Some Buttigieg supporters in Iowa said they were drawn to the mayor because of his focus on unity.

"He understands that the country is breaking, and that the number one priority has to be finding a way to bring that together," said Jeff Wilkerson, a faculty member at Luther College. "And I feel like that is not Warren's message. Her message is to fix some of these other problems no matter what it takes to fix these other problems, but I think he is right, you can't fix those problems without fixing that we were divided."

The race, though, remains exceptionally fluid, a fact that campaigns throughout Iowa know as they prepare for the final three months.

Christine Peterson, an English teacher from Mason City, said before the Democratic debate in October, Peterson believed she was "100% in Warren's camp."

"She does have a plan, and the fact is that when you have a plan, you want to fight for it," she said in support of Warren.

But after watching the debate and learning more about Buttigieg, Peterson decided to come out to his Mason City event and is now considering supporting him.

"He really did hit the unification part hard," she said. "And what I really appreciated was it wasn't just about unification of the party, but the country and I do think that is a message that a lot of people want to hear."

Could Warren do that?

"I feel like she could," Peterson said with a pause, "but she would have to work harder to get there."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

MSDNC @MSDNCNews

#BREAKING:

Elizabeth Warren releases new, must-see campaign ad highlighting the Senator’s vast knowledge of her own Medicare For All plan.

Wow!  

I don't think this is helpful.  

I think its made to appear to be from MSNBC - which it obviously is not.

I think it purports to be a campaign Ad from Warren - which it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is room to criticize Warren (or any of the candidates) without resorting to the kind of fake news that spreads headlines - without an underlying story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not really seeing why somebody who prefers Liz Warren would also be interested in Pete Buttigieg, unless their vote is based primarily on personality and charisma. Policy wise they’re distinctly different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I don't think this is helpful.  

I think its made to appear to be from MSNBC - which it obviously is not.

I think it purports to be a campaign Ad from Warren - which it is not.

It is a joke from an obvious parody account.  No need to fret over fake news panic.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I’m not really seeing why somebody who prefers Liz Warren would also be interested in Pete Buttigieg, unless their vote is based primarily on personality and charisma. Policy wise they’re distinctly different. 

I think it has a lot to do with personality.  Both are relatively fresh faces to the national scene, when the key alternatives are Biden and Sanders.

 

Of the 4 - I would rank my interest as: Buttigieg, Warren, Sanders, Biden.

 

And, I don't think they are "distinctly" different.  Warren wants to move towards far left positions.  Pete wants to move towards far left positions.  The only real difference is in the magnitude of the first step.  And, if everyone is being honest - Warren is never going to get to her destination in one step.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ren hoek said:

It is a joke from an obvious parody account.  No need to fret over fake news panic.  

Sure.  But then label it as such.

Say: "I thought this was funny, and sums up how I think about Warren's plan"

Don't try to pass it off as "Elizabeth Warren releases new, must-see campaign ad highlighting the Senator’s vast knowledge of her own Medicare For All plan."  Because that is not what the clip was.

 

Fake news spreads when we allow obvious false messaging to become mainstream.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have ZERO issues with trying to be funny.  We need more funny.  Its not that you posted the clip - its that you labeled it as a real Ad.

But, lets not try to pass off funny as real news.  

 

FTR - Pete released an Ad in Iowa this morning - so I had reason to think Warren would also release an Ad today - thus clicking on the link to see what she had to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I’m not really seeing why somebody who prefers Liz Warren would also be interested in Pete Buttigieg, unless their vote is based primarily on personality and charisma. Policy wise they’re distinctly different. 

I don't thinks so!   I think they both see pretty much the same end goal.  The difference is that Warren wants to jump to that end game in fewer increments while Buttigieg is more of an incrementalist.   Absent a crisis this nation is always small increments (which favors Mayor Pete), but would he "let  a good crisis go to waste" and remain an incrementalist?   Believing that she would absolutely seize an opportunity would favor Elizabeth (and Bernie - Bernie's entire pitch is that we already in this crisis which isn't as helpful so far this time around).

I think the best example of this is when Pete talks about "Medicare For All Who Want It" he is saying that once you do that "Medicare for All" is inevitable.  He just doesn't say it directly-

After Stephanopoulos asked whether Buttigieg's objection to Medicare for All is that it can't pass or wouldn't work, the South Bend mayor replied that "I think it could very well be the long-run destination, but I think there's got to be some humility in our policy here. Let's put this out there and see if it's really the best plan for everybody." he added that "if it's the right plan, then everybody will move to it until it is the single payer. And if it's not the right plan for everybody, then we're going to be really glad we didn't kick some Americans off their private plans."

But which outcome does he actually believe will happen?  

"Now here’s how I would do it. It’s very similar. I would call it Medicare for All Who Want It. you take something like Medicare, a flavor of that, and you make it available on the exchanges it. People can buy in. and then if people like us are right that that will be not only a more inclusive plan, but a more efficient plan than any of the corporate answers out there, then it will be a very natural glide path to the single payer environment."

Edited by Bottomfeeder Sports
Sentences got all of place
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't see all that much difference between Warren & Buttigieg politically except for orientation - Advocate/Senator v. Mayor, issues v. governance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

Sure.  But then label it as such.

Say: "I thought this was funny, and sums up how I think about Warren's plan"

Don't try to pass it off as "Elizabeth Warren releases new, must-see campaign ad highlighting the Senator’s vast knowledge of her own Medicare For All plan."  Because that is not what the clip was.

 

Fake news spreads when we allow obvious false messaging to become mainstream.

Well, half the joke is thinking you’re walking into a real ad and realizing (the cheesy music, the multiple ‘wow’ edits, the parody ‘msdnc’ account) that it’s not a real indepth walkthrough of her plan. It’s just a joke.  

If I say it’s a parody before hand, to me it lessens the humor but more importantly, I don’t see why you think it’s necessary.  No one’s clicking on that and saying ‘well I guess that’s her official explanation for M4A.’  No one thinks MSDNC is a real news network, or if they did, they certainly won’t after watching the video.  It’s obvious satire.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i knew of a guy once, went around the county poisoning wells. every time he got caught, he'd throw his hands up and say "fluoride"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Iowa Poll

 

NEW  @QuinnipiacPoll  of Iowa Democrats:

 
Warren 20%
Buttigieg 19%
Sanders 17%
Biden 15%
Klobuchar 5%
Harris 4%
Steyer, Gabbard, Yang 3% each

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know there's a little time  left, but is looking like we may stick at nine for next debate?

eta Gabbard is in, so ten. 

Also, Klobuchar made December. 

Edited by Mystery Achiever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, beef said:

How does this work, like options trading?  :bag:

You buy a position - so, you would but a share of Buttigieg for $0.32 - the price will go up and down and you can sell at any time.  The market will pay $1.00 for each share that "wins", and zero out all losing positions.

You could also buy "no" on Buttigieg - I can't see the price because I am invested in "yes" - but Warren is $0.36 yes, and $0.65 no right now.

(As I type this Buttigieg has dropped to $0.29)

The site takes a cut of the profits you make and a cash withdrawal fee. I learned of it from  @Maurile Tremblay  so he may have more experience than I in how it operates.  I don't know if the site makes markets, or simply acts as the broker - making money on the margins, and in the share of profits. 

 

link to FAQs: https://www.predictit.org/support/faq

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

I just checked into predictit - Iowa market has reacted strongly - presumably to Quinnipiac Poll:

Warren $0.34
Buttigieg $0.32 :shock:

Sanders $0.23
Biden $0.12

 

https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/5241/Who-will-win-the-2020-Iowa-Democratic-caucuses

 

Current:

Buttigieg $0.35

Warren $0.34

 

Probably the first time/place anywhere where Buttigieg is the favorite to win Iowa.  I expect Warren to be back in front by the end of the day - but it does validate my thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.