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 Democrat Primary/Caucus Thread*** Biden Is Your Demoractic Nominee (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter BassNBrew
- Start date
timschochet
Footballguy
McCarthyism wasn’t about teasing politicians for their odd political views; it was about persecuting and blacklisting innocent NON-politicians for their friendships and connections. It’s amazing how people misuse this term these days.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer
Footballguy
ren hoek
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Rooting big time for Amy tonight.
Amy or Bloomberg I’m thinking, for the win. Biden just doesn’t have it I’m afraid. Still love Pete but I can’t see him getting it done.
Warren in 5th now? Catastrophic for her.
Amy or Bloomberg I’m thinking, for the win. Biden just doesn’t have it I’m afraid. Still love Pete but I can’t see him getting it done.
Warren in 5th now? Catastrophic for her.
timschochet
Footballguy
I suppose you can blame Perez for Iowa if you take an absolutist “the buck stops here” attitude, though in reality he had nothing to do with the specific issues involved. But beyond that I don’t see what’s wrong with him at all. Bernie and Tulsi people don’t like him because he’s a Democrat, a long time member of the Party, and they’re pretty much interlopers. So what?
adonis
Footballguy
Bloomberg? Buying the candidacy? He's a non-starter for me for that reason. if he showed up to debates, did normal campaigning, I'd consider him, but no.
And Amy...I like her, and would vote for her if she won, but I don't see a ton there that makes her stand out above Pete.
timschochet
Footballguy
Your points would be valid except for this election. Just keep repeating this question. Who beats Trump?
For instance you know why I like Bloomberg? Because he drives Trump crazy!! That’s a good thing. That makes up for any faults he has. And you know what makes Amy stand out above Pete? Because she will do better in the swing states. She’s got a better shot in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. Eyes on the Prize.
msommer
Footballguy
Since he is self financing AFAIK he doesn't qualify for the debates (there is a minimum amount of donors to appear). I'm sure he'd love to get free airtime
Last edited by a moderator:
adonis
Footballguy
Trump barely won in 2016. He's not some juggernaut. We need a competent candidate who the party can get behind, who not only can beat Trump, but who can govern effectively during his/her term.
Bloomberg is a political opportunistic former Republican running as a democrat because that's his only path to winning. In an age marked by income inequality, a financial system that screws over the working class, we're going to have one billionaire running against another...each of whom switched their political party recently. Both of whom are out of touch with the common person.
Bloomberg would be better than Trump, but several other options would be better than Bloomberg, and I think once the dust settles from the primary, the party will coalesce around the candidate and at that point, it'll be about getting out the vote. I don't think Trump's in a better position in 2020 than he was in 2016, so he's definitely beatable.
adonis
Footballguy
It's his choice to self finance and bypass the debates rather than building up a base of supporters who believe in/support him and shows they have americans behind him. Apparently all he needs is insane amounts of cash to equate to the millions of supporters the other candidates have. It's undemocratic to me to buy in like this. If he wanted to be a viable standard candidate, announce like the rest of them, and garner support in order to justify that folks want him as president.
msommer
Footballguy
Dickies
Footballguy
After all this time telling us all that Biden was our only hope when most of us could see he’s out of it.
adonis
Footballguy
Yeah, and you're right. Just looking to chat about it, not necessarily disagree with you.
adonis
Footballguy
"He didn't have it 12 years ago, what has changed that makes him have it now other than being picked by Obama to shore up votes for Obama's campaign?"
After all this time telling us all that Biden was our only hope when most of us could see he’s out of it.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I find a bit of irony in Democrats, the progressive, inclusive, forward thinking party morally situated, so they believe, to lecture others on diversity, inclusion, and equal rights, shying away from a gay candidate as unelectable, or less electable. Principles are one thing we are being told, but electability and power another. once power is obtained, we are told, then, then we can enact our principles.
Me, I say if they are not worth adhering to during hard times they are not principles. I say if they are for sale that makes those selling whores, no better than what the say they will replace. Stand for something. If Pete is the best, put him forward.
Me, I say if they are not worth adhering to during hard times they are not principles. I say if they are for sale that makes those selling whores, no better than what the say they will replace. Stand for something. If Pete is the best, put him forward.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I did go back and reread the beginning of the Biden thread where I had a discussion with Tim.
After all this time telling us all that Biden was our only hope when most of us could see he’s out of it.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
This is just horrible. You'd seriously advocate for a candidate simply because he annoys the sitting President?
That makes up for ANY faults he has?
How about supporting a candidate because like their policies and believe in their vision for America?
McBokonon
Footballguy
I'm not talking about Pete here, but if there was a normal Republican running I know I would agree and I might be willing to support a "riskier" candidate. But I don't see this election as electing a Democrat as much as it is removing the national emergency currently occupying the White House.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
He could very easily have done the Tom Steyer move of asking people to donate $1 to his campaign.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
Nobody is shying away from Pete as being unelectable. That term is used, almost exclusively, on Bernie and Warren.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I respectfully disagree. We have seen that very argument made in this thread many times.
I've seen a number of people on this board saying he can't win in the south because he's gay.
Dickies
Footballguy
Trump has sexually assaulted dozens of women, stole from a charity, created a fraudulent university, and used campaign money to pay hush money to a porn star that he was banging while his wife was pregnant, but I have a moral standard to uphold so he gets my vote because the other guy is gay.
mcintyre1
Footballguy
Honestly outside of this forum and a couple references to his being gay hurting him with southern black voters (which I don't fully agree with), I haven't ever really seen his sexuality be an issue. The left hates him because they think he's a neolib owned by the oligarchy (which I think is def exaggerated).
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
Fair enough. I’ve stayed mostly out of Oete threads. I certainly haven’t heard close to that narrative in the media.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
No, the media has, to my observations, which are sporadic, not done this at all. They have mentioned that he has not connected with back voters, yet, but have not pursued why that might be.
Mystery Achiever
Footballguy
There was that Iowa caucuser who wanted her vote back after she found out he was gay.
timschochet
Footballguy
I want to clarify my thoughts on this because it's important (to me):
The southern states primaries are largely dominated by blacks (because whites in those states largely abandoned the Democratic party following the Civil Rights movement). These blacks, the ones that vote, tend to be older, religious, and morally conservative. That's part of the reason Buttigieg has ZERO black support in the south. BUT- that is against other Democrats. If Buttigieg were to somehow win the nomination anyhow, the vast majority of blacks around the country would vote for him. They will NOT sit home over this issue IMO. So this is only an issue in the nomination process, not in the general election.
timschochet
Footballguy
Jim Clyburn came out and said it. He regards homosexuality as immoral. Clyburn is arguably the most influential player in politics, has been for years. His endorsement of Obama over Hillary won South Carolina for Obama. His endorsement of Hillary over Bernie won South Carolina for Hillary. Etc.
It's a problem.
msommer
Footballguy
Clearly he also chose not to follow them. Not sure I've heard an argumentation asto why.
Is he implicitly suggesting that the other politicians that are not self financing are (or might be) selling influence?
Is it a critique of Citizen United?
Does he simply lack other things to do with his money?
mcintyre1
Footballguy
msommer
Footballguy
whoknew
Footballguy
I don't think it means he can't win, but I have no doubt that Trump will absolutely make it an issue.
Mystery Achiever
Footballguy
FWIW, he qualified it was older voters (who I do realize are more likely to vote). His grandson is a paid staffer for Buttigieg.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
Oh, I’m sure Trump will make limp-wrist gestures and start lisping, but he’ll do something like that for anyone. If Bernie’s the nominee he’ll probably wear a Shylock wig.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Not for nothing, but the primary system isn't exactly a constitutional mandate. It's political parties using taxpayer money/time/airwaves etc. to help fund their own decision making process in an effort to make it look like they don't "smoke cigars in the back room and play with people's lives." It's show. It's always been show.
Bloomberg is the opposite end of the system that designed Iowa and New Hampshire to be the initial arbiters of who is the front runner to be President of the United States. The whole thing is silly in that way.
I think it would be entertaining for the Democratic race to ultimately come down to Bloomberg versus Sanders -- two non-Democrats.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
And besides, anybody who gets the nomination is going to annoy the sitting president. Those radiation poisoning victims in Chernobyl had thicker skin than Trump.
fatguyinalittlecoat
Footballguy
It would be entertaining but I think that particular pairing would really expose the divisions in the party.
adonis
Footballguy
I agree. I don't know what an optimal primary season option would look like, but I'm fairly sure it wouldn't resemble the insanely wealthy buying into campaigns like Bloomberg is doing.
NorvilleBarnes
Footballguy
I was reading something about bad turnout, and apparently part of it was "I am voting for whoever wins, I don't really care who", so they did not bother to waste time caucusing for hours. I cannot find where I read that at the moment, so no idea if it is true or not.
Shula-holic
Footballguy
Conventional political theory has always been more people show up to vote for something than show up to vote against something. I guess come November we will find out if that's accurate
Phil Elliott
Footballguy
With the special accommodations the DNC is giving Bloomberg, the DNC is continuing to lose cred. But I agree with you it will be entertaining.
Might be different if it is a caucus where you know it will take 4 hours, vs mail in ballots or some other lower effort method of voting, but I have no idea if my initial premise is correct, so not going to think to hard about it. I probably could not find time to vote in a caucus, even if I would want to. Luckily I have like 3 weeks to vote by mail.
Similar threads
