What's new
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.

The Democrats need to wake up! Update: And near the last second, THEY HAVE (1 Viewer)

He was projected to win Iowa. He is projected to win New Hampshire. 

Look we can go back and forth on this stuff but we just won’t know until we get to South Carolina and then Super Tuesday. That’s when we will discover, truly, if Bernie has expanded his base or if he hasn’t. If you’re right I will be sure to recall this conversation and give you credit
Fair enough.   :thumbup:

 
And that’s fair.  

In the case of Bernie I have a simpler argument: Medicare for All is a losing issue in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. I think voters in those 3 states will stick with Trump if that is the choice they’re looking at. That’s the gist of it. 
OK, that's fair on your end.  My prediction/guess is Bernie's other policy positions and his personality will be enough in those swing states to beat Trump.  Time will tell.

 
On what are you basing this claim?  According to the information I'm looking at, he outperformed any expectations in Iowa, leading total votes in the first vote over Pete by 6,000 votes and leading in the final votes by nearly 3,000 votes.  He got very strong support from Latinos.  And quite frankly, they STILL have not called Iowa yet.  No one expected him to win Iowa.

In NH he is leading polling at 26.4% vs Pete at 19.1% (to say nothing of the ridiculously un-earned 6 point bump PETE got in the last 4 days from the media proclaiming him the winner for three straight days when they didn't have nearly the data to do so).  Bernie's polling from January was at 19% vs Pete at 13%. 

How do you possibly read that as Bernie's numbers not growing?  

ETA: FiveThirtyEight has Bernie as the prohibitive favorite to win the nomination at 1 in 2.  The next person is NO ONE at 1 in 4.  Biden is at 1 in 5 and Warren & Pete are at 1 in 20 and 1 in 25, respectively.
A 78 year old curmudgeonly looking socialist will not have staying power.  Time for the next generation to emerge.  What are the odds his health holds even through the convention, more less inauguration?  Same for obese Donald with obvious high blood pressure and anger management issues.  Same for Plagiarizing Joe who daily shows mental deterioration.  Every day that goes bye they just get older while Mayor Pete gets needed seasoning.

 
A 78 year old curmudgeonly looking socialist will not have staying power.  Time for the next generation to emerge.  What are the odds his health holds even through the convention, more less inauguration?  Same for obese Donald with obvious high blood pressure and anger management issues.  Same for Plagiarizing Joe who daily shows mental deterioration.  Every day that goes bye they just get older while Mayor Pete gets needed seasoning.
No argument here.  

ETA.  However, it is interesting that the 78 year old curmudgeonly looking socialist gets the most youngins out to vote for him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maximum benefit?  Ha.  The left could not have done worse.  Two hay makers thrown while blindfolded by partisanship, denial, and desperation.

Anyone with a non biased bone in their body could (and did) see this train wreck coming years ago.  
I made a similar argument earlier. Also throw in defeating every Republican in 2016 and Hillary Clinton. It’s no use though, one of the anti-Trump guys said a “field mouse” could beat Trump in 2020. These guys are going down with the ship here. 

 
I can see healthcare being an issue in the battleground states, but I don't think it's first and foremost.  I doubt many will care that they have insurance if they don't have a job.  That's where this should be guided in those states and the midwest.  People losing their jobs in those areas and farmers being steamrolled because the China tariff debacle.  

 
I don’t think it’s insulting to label someone an ideologue. It basically means a thinker, somebody who is consistent in their political philosophy and very knowledgeable about that philosophy, 
So basically the opposite of Hillary who lost to Donald freaking trump 

 
Actually I don’t. I thought I did; currently Pete’s support among southern blacks is...zero. 

But they have to vote for somebody. If Biden loses NH as badly as projected he will no longer be seen as “most electable”. Most black southern voters are too conservative for Bernie or Warren. They don’t know Klobuchar and Bloomberg’s got stop and frisk. So maybe they will take a 2nd look at Pete; who knows? I don’t. Neither do you. 
ON MSNBC I've heard some black analysts talking about this question and their answer is: Bloomberg. Blacks in South Carolina want to see how Biden is going to do in New Hampshire (badly it looks like). And if he does badly, they are talking about turning to Bloomberg en masse. They're just not going for Buttigieg, or Bernie. Bloomberg is the guy. They're willing to forgive stop and frisk. They don't care. Number one priority for black voters: get rid of Trump, and they see Bloomberg as the guy.

 
FWIW, I caught up with two Republican friends this afternoon who couldn't be more thrilled with their chances of a Trump re-election. They both said Pelosi ripping the speech paper was the day they were sure Trump would win again. They are giddy about the idea of facing Sanders.

They think Carville (and I guess Tim) are the only people who get it. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville
Carville was a little dangerous in that piece, talking about raw power as a thing to be attained. It's a procedure away from a strongman. Really surprised to hear somebody so intertwined with the political scene casually toss out revolution if there is no hope for one side of the political spectrum. Dangerous words, more than Trump has even uttered.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carville was a little dangerous in that piece, talking about raw power as a thing to be attained. It's a procedure away from a strongman. Really surprised to hear somebody so intertwined with the political scene to casually toss out revolution if there is no hope for one side of the political spectrum. Dangerous words, more than Trump has even uttered.
Agreed.  It exposed a glaring truth about Democrats: They aren't in it to help people out.  They're in it for pure power.  Plain and Simple. Cut and Dried.  Make no mistake, it's never been about "the people".  That's only used to fool the masses into giving them, well, pure power.

 
ON MSNBC I've heard some black analysts talking about this question and their answer is: Bloomberg. Blacks in South Carolina want to see how Biden is going to do in New Hampshire (badly it looks like). And if he does badly, they are talking about turning to Bloomberg en masse. They're just not going for Buttigieg, or Bernie. Bloomberg is the guy. They're willing to forgive stop and frisk. They don't care. Number one priority for black voters: get rid of Trump, and they see Bloomberg as the guy.
Such a monolith.  Did they have a meeting to make this determination or is it a form of hive mentality?  The queen lets out a pheromone and they all react in a swarm

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Big fan of Carville and that interview is hilarious. But he's really talking about general election strategy and the Dems are in the middle of a primary 12-way battle. Most of the things he's talking about will happen after a nomination. I disagree with his take on 2018 (shocker) - imo, it mostly boils down to: Dems were fired up and Republicans stayed home. Not that unusual for a mid-term. But if one wants to believe there was something magical about the 18 message, alrighty.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FWIW, I caught up with two Republican friends this afternoon who couldn't be more thrilled with their chances of a Trump re-election. They both said Pelosi ripping the speech paper was the day they were sure Trump would win again. They are giddy about the idea of facing Sanders.

They think Carville (and I guess Tim) are the only people who get it. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville
They have every reason to be confident right now, but probably the Democrats’ best chance to win is if Trump and his supporters become as arrogant and confident as Clinton’s were in 2016.  

 
Joe Bryant said:
FWIW, I caught up with two Republican friends this afternoon who couldn't be more thrilled with their chances of a Trump re-election. They both said Pelosi ripping the speech paper was the day they were sure Trump would win again. They are giddy about the idea of facing Sanders.

They think Carville (and I guess Tim) are the only people who get it. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville
I agree with Carville that you have to find a candidate that will not only win the Presidency, but also has coattails. Of the candidates available, I think the one most likely to pull that off is Sanders. He's capable of whipping up enough enthusiasm to bring enough extra to the polls to pull that off. I don't see any of the remaining candidates being in a better situation in that regard. But Carville doesn't like Sanders because no true Scottsman. It's weak reasoning on his part.

He also goes on to rant (and yes he was ranting, which kind of undercuts his lament about the Democrats losing it as this interview was pretty much Carville losing it), about how Democrats are smug and that's offensive to large swathes of the country. Sanders is one of, if not the, least smug candidates left. His whole thing is relating to and fighting for the "non-elite."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with Carville that you have to find a candidate that will not only win the Presidency, but also has coattails. Of the candidates available, I think the one most likely to pull that off is Sanders. He's capable of whipping up enough enthusiasm to bring enough extra to the polls to pull that off. I don't see any of the remaining candidates being in a better situation in that regard. But Carville doesn't like Sanders because no true Scottsman. It's weak reasoning on his part.

He also goes on to rant (and yes he was ranting, which kind of undercuts his lament about the Democrats losing it as this interview was pretty much Carville losing it), about how Democrats are smug and that's offensive to large swathes of the country. Sanders is one of, if not the, least smug candidates left. His whole thing is relating to and fighting for the "non-elite."
Yeah, but Sanders has that whole Socialist nonsense going on so that's going to hurt him even more in the General Election, coattails be damned!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
CletiusMaximus said:
They have every reason to be confident right now, but probably the Democrats’ best chance to win is if Trump and his supporters become as arrogant and confident as Clinton’s were in 2016.  
Agreed.

 
It’s going to be Bernie, and it should be Bernie, and here’s why. It’s time to be done with Republican Lite. That includes Hillary and Biden. It’s the President’s role to set the tone. So just because M4A may not pass, it’s the right thing to strive for. Bernie has the right vision, he’s aspirational, and a good guy. That’s what we need. Not some centrist version of what the Republicans are already about. I’m pushing all my chips in with Bernie and I hope when the time comes you are all with me and let’s get rid of this dastardly administration and the lies and the filth.

 
Joe Bryant said:
FWIW, I caught up with two Republican friends this afternoon who couldn't be more thrilled with their chances of a Trump re-election. They both said Pelosi ripping the speech paper was the day they were sure Trump would win again. They are giddy about the idea of facing Sanders.

They think Carville (and I guess Tim) are the only people who get it. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/7/21123518/trump-2020-election-democratic-party-james-carville
Look while your friends and I share some views about this, I don’t agree with them. I think Trump WILL lose the election IF the Democrats are smart. Will they be? That remains to be seen. 

The Pelosi thing is a minor incident though. It won’t be remembered at all when it’s time to vote. 

 
It’s going to be Bernie, and it should be Bernie, and here’s why. It’s time to be done with Republican Lite. That includes Hillary and Biden. It’s the President’s role to set the tone. So just because M4A may not pass, it’s the right thing to strive for. Bernie has the right vision, he’s aspirational, and a good guy. That’s what we need. Not some centrist version of what the Republicans are already about. I’m pushing all my chips in with Bernie and I hope when the time comes you are all with me and let’s get rid of this dastardly administration and the lies and the filth.
I couldn't disagree more.  Sanders will never get any moderate votes.  Hell, I'm not sure I would vote for him and i hate Trump.  He is too far left.  I think carville is spot on.  

Hopefully Biden belly flops in new Hampshire and opens up the moderate avenue for bennet and others.

 
NorvilleBarnes said:
Big fan of Carville and that interview is hilarious. But he's really talking about general election strategy and the Dems are in the middle of a primary 12-way battle. Most of the things he's talking about will happen after a nomination. I disagree with his take on 2018 (shocker) - imo, it mostly boils down to: Dems were fired up and Republicans stayed home. Not that unusual for a mid-term. But if one wants to believe there was something magical about the 18 message, alrighty.
Not if trump and repubs mention all of their far left ideas back into the general election.  Debt forgiveness...non starter to almost everyone who worked their ### off to pay back their loans.  Medicare for all...not as popular as the Twitter hoards think.  Granted I'm in hickville Oklahoma, but even the liberal ones don't like that.  Especially those that have employeer provided insurance that they like.

 
It’s going to be Bernie, and it should be Bernie, and here’s why. It’s time to be done with Republican Lite. That includes Hillary and Biden. It’s the President’s role to set the tone. So just because M4A may not pass, it’s the right thing to strive for. Bernie has the right vision, he’s aspirational, and a good guy. That’s what we need. Not some centrist version of what the Republicans are already about. I’m pushing all my chips in with Bernie and I hope when the time comes you are all with me and let’s get rid of this dastardly administration and the lies and the filth.
I don't know the headline on CNN tonight was already targeting him link 

It is amazing how CNN posts something in a big headline and then when you check back 20 minutes later it is watered down . The headline earlier was really derogatory towards Bernie, but now it has magically become a little more passive. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lawrence O Donnell tried to make an argument on behalf of Bernie tonight to the effect that socialism is no longer a dirty word in this country because what we have a mixed economy, part capitalist part socialist. So he doesn’t think calling Bernie a socialist will hurt him. 

He’s right about the mixed economy but he failed to mention that we’ve had one since 1933, and all that time socialism has been a dirty word and continues to be a dirty word. This is because Americans, particularly middle class and above, like to believe that they’ve earned what they have through hard work without any help from others. That’s why when Obama said, accurately “you didn’t build that”, so many people rejected it because they don’t want to believe that they benefited in anyway from the contribution of nameless and faceless others. 

 
Lol - voters who want to defeat Trump should absolutely take advice from James Carville.  What a shocker, Clinton crony says Dem party should go with a centrist. Why not run Hillary again, or bring on Chelsea? What a brilliant political strategist!! 

 
I am reading Rick Wilson’s new book Running Against the Devil . Wilson was a Republican strategist for years and he’s now devoted to defeating Trump. He’s trying to advise the Democrats what to do and what not to do and boy does he ever make a lot a sense! I will quote sections of the book as I read them in this thread. 

 
Let’s start with this from Chapter 1: 

Many of our Democratic friends exist in a beautiful fantasy bubble, as though the GOP’s 20 year march through their electoral numbers across the nation had never happened. For them, history began in 2018. 

They ascribe all their losses to imagined boogeymen like gerrymandering or the Koch brothers or Citizens United, because the deeper causes are too painful to examine honestly: policy and cultural disconnects, reliance on generational superstar candidates, and crappy campaigns run for the base alone while scorning and insulting the middle. “But we won X!” is a sad cover for the systematic, slow trend line of their loss of power in both Congress and state governments, particularly in the South and Midwest. We Republicans weren’t geniuses. You made it easy for us. 

This is stuff Democrats really need to hear, IMO. 

 
A little more: 

Democrats don’t need to sell the progressive base on opposition to Trump. They don’t need to sell the rank and file. They don’t need to sell African-Americans. They don’t need to sell most Hispanics. They do need to make the case that Trump is a mentally and morally unwell man, and that he sold a pack of lies to the voters in the 15 or so swing states that matter in 2020. 

 
A little more: 

Democrats don’t need to sell the progressive base on opposition to Trump. They don’t need to sell the rank and file. They don’t need to sell African-Americans. They don’t need to sell most Hispanics. They do need to make the case that Trump is a mentally and morally unwell man, and that he sold a pack of lies to the voters in the 15 or so swing states that matter in 2020. 
This was exactly what Hillary tried to do.  :shrug:  www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2017/3/8/14848636/hillary-clinton-tv-ads

 
I am reading Rick Wilson’s new book Running Against the Devil . Wilson was a Republican strategist for years and he’s now devoted to defeating Trump. He’s trying to advise the Democrats what to do and what not to do and boy does he ever make a lot a sense! I will quote sections of the book as I read them in this thread. 
Just a hunch, but I don’t think Democrats are going to take advice from an ex-Republican strategist who hasn’t been right about anything in years. 

 
How do Bennett, Patrick and Bloomberg get in this thing?  Is the plan a goof super Tuesday showing? 
For Bloomberg yes, the others have no shot.  I've never seen the punting the early states thing work.  I still remember Rudy running and planning on starting to compete when it got to Florida.  By the time it got there he was already buried and had no shot.

 
I am reading Rick Wilson’s new book Running Against the Devil . Wilson was a Republican strategist for years and he’s now devoted to defeating Trump. He’s trying to advise the Democrats what to do and what not to do and boy does he ever make a lot a sense! I will quote sections of the book as I read them in this thread. 
This is the Deplorables 2.0 guy, right?

Some strategist.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top