timschochet
Footballguy
You haven't explained the part where it "gives Biden a much better chance." Will Biden get more delegates at the convention if Bernie stays in the race?
You haven't explained the part where it "gives Biden a much better chance." Will Biden get more delegates at the convention if Bernie stays in the race?
I would think so, yeah.You haven't explained the part where it "gives Biden a much better chance." Will Biden get more delegates at the convention if Bernie stays in the race?
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.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.
Morning Consult polls second choices, and Biden is the second choice for a plurality of Bernie supporters.Look I didn't say that it locks up Biden as the winner but of course it helps him. If Bernie drops out, all his support goes to Warren. If Bernie stays in, he splits up the progressive vote and that gives Biden a much better chance. This isn't complicated.
OK, this is a much better argument than Tim's.Morning Consult polls second choices, and Biden is the second choice for a plurality of Bernie supporters.
OKSo 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.
As a Republican, I fully support Warren or Bernie...whichever socialist has the best chance of losing to the Republicans.
We must preserve capitalism(our form of it), freedom and the American way of life.
Sanders: $25.3 millionUpdate:
Sanders: $25M
Buttigieg: $19M
Booker: $6M
Booker will be out before Iowa unless he makes a big move in the next couple of months. He rallied late, just to get to $6M, but that is not enough to run an effective campaign in the early states.
Adding YangSanders: $25.3 million
Buttigieg: $19.1 million
Harris: $11.6 million
Yang: $10 million
Booker: $6 million
I agree - but I also think she is a prohibitive favorite right now.timschochet said: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.
Not prohibitive this far out, but she is over 50% today on electionbettingodds.com.I agree - but I also think she is a prohibitive favorite right now.
And then?Looking for a statistic. What % of the black vote is considered uneducated? Just want the number.
This didn't go unnoticed...well doneAs a Republican, I fully support Warren or Bernie...whichever socialist has the best chance of losing to the Republicans.
We must preserve capitalism(our form of it), freedom and the American way of life.
No it isn’t. I objected to the earlier question about Trump’s base; yours is worse.Just numbers. We are breaking down trump's base as uneducated. I wanted to know what %of AA voters are considered uneducated. It's a fair question.
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?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.
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.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?
Lets be honest Tim - you were certain Trump (or any GOP candidate) would only lose to Clinton last cycle...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.
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.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.
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.Lets be honest Tim - you were certain Trump (or any GOP candidate) would only lose to Clinton last cycle...
Because a lot of independents and conservatives who don’t like Trump are scared of Warren’s proposals.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.
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.Why are so many of them insisting on rolling the dice with Warren if Biden is a sure thing?
OK. I can respect that POVI'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.
I think electing a temperamental old white guy is an unnecessary risk.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.
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.Because a lot of independents and conservatives who don’t like Trump are scared of Warren’s proposals.
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.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.Because a lot of independents and conservatives who don’t like Trump are scared of Warren’s proposals.
Are you scared of Warren's proposals?Because a lot of independents and conservatives who don’t like Trump are scared of Warren’s proposals.
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.Are you scared of Warren's proposals?
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.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.
Biden isn’t a sure thing.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?
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
Normally I would agree with this analysis, as cutting as it is to me, lol.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.
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."Because a lot of independents and conservatives who don’t like Trump are scared of Warren’s proposals.
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.A this point, I'm thinking Buttigieg is going to pull this thing off.
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.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?
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.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.
I can respect this POV like the one earlier by fatguy.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!