Democrats need to be unified- for now. (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

You change your position on this with each poll.

So many times.

That's because the numbers change with each poll.

How Joe Biden performed in a debate isn't exactly a principled argument. I'm allowed to change my opinion, based on the numbers, over and over and over again. And I have. 

 

[identikit]

That's because the numbers change with each poll.

How Joe Biden performed in a debate isn't exactly a principled argument. I'm allowed to change my opinion, based on the numbers, over and over and over again. And I have. 

I don't like waffles.

But that's ok.

You are allowed to flip flop.

 

[whoknew]

How crazy did you think Trump winning in 2016 was?

I follow 538 pretty closely so I thought he had about a 30% chance of winning. 

 

[HellToupee]

But he did. Look at the polling. His numbers went down initially and now they've gone back up. He lost a tiny bit of ground, but significantly he support among Blacks and in South Carolina hasn't moved. Biden wasn't great but he did what he had to. He held serve for now. 

Biden was horrendous. He looked old and out of touch, wasn’t quick on his feet at all. Looked like he did zero prep work because Harris caught him with his pants down . 

It doesn't mean he can’t do a good job going forward but he better be prepared to be hit from all sides.  

 

[PhantomJB]

What you and NCCommish and the other progressives around here need to realize is this: you're going to win. You're going to win because the combination of technology taking jobs away plus climate change is going to force progressive solutions on our society, and because the younger our population gets the more accepting of those ideas we are. In some ways Trump's Presidency can be looked at as a last gasp of the forces fighting against progressive change. The progressives will triumph. But it's still too soon. It's going to take about 10-15 years for it to happen. In the meantime, we can be stuck with Trumpism (both him and his successors) and everything that entails, and then finally reach the future we need with a whole lot of painful shock, or we can have moderate liberals come in and pave the way for the transition. Those are your choices; which do you prefer?

I don't generally like to nitpick a post but this is where you are dead wrong. Maybe not in terms of fundamental rights but most definitely in terms of social programs.

The vast majority of current progressive programs require massive amounts of federal funds...the younger generations have no clue how to operate in an environment of financial scarcity. 

There will be no "progressive triumph." Once the unfunded liabilities and national debt cause the economy to implode it will take the progressive movement right along with it.

 

[ren hoek]

Maybe Pelosi should shut up.  Why are people listening to her and not the progressives in her party who A. want radical change commensurate with the scale of the problems we’re facing, now.  B. support initiatives that are overwhelmingly popular with people in general, C. have a much bigger stake in the future than geriatric swampbeings such as Pelosi, and D. aren’t manifestly corrupt slimeballs like Nancy Pelosi is.  

I think centrists are the real extremists.  The “center” gave us endless war, warrantless surveillance, mass killing abroad, total fealty to the banking industry, torture, child prison camps, endless corruption in Washington, a revolving door between Congress and the lobbies that give them money.  That’s the “center” now- that’s the system that Pelosi, the DNC and the GOP refuse to reckon with.  That’s the system that gave us Trump.  That’s the system Pelosi has spent her whole career running interference for. 

It’s time for change.  I understand disagreeing with their approach, but not their sense of urgency.  Pelosi deadenders deserve every second of the Trump 2020 repeat they end up with. 

 

[Jackstraw]

Progressive policies are pretty popular. 

 

[lod001]

So this a polite message to Alexandria Ocacio-Cortez, Ihlan Omar, and the rest of their crowd: 

Shut the hell up. 

Just for now, just for the time being. Yes, you have real complaints and they deserve being addressed. But table them until after November of 2020. Keep your eyes on the prize. We may not love each other but we need to stick together until then. Afterwards, after we have achieved the main goal, then we can have all the struggle and turmoil you want. 

The nation is ready to vote for the Democrats. They want to vote for the Democrats. They don’t like what’s going on. But we need to show them that we can control ourselves. So listen to Pelosi for now, show her respect, and let us win next November. Then we’ll see. 

You can feel it slipping away, huh?

 

[Widbil83]

What? for calling Pelosi a racist? Isn't that the democratic strategy? Call everyone you disagree with a racist?

This was the Democrat strategy against Republicans, now the inmates have literally taken over the asylum and turned the tables.  If you told Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden 4 years ago, heck 6 months ago, that popular stars in their party would be openly calling them racist they would have looked at you like you were a space alien.  It’s just stunning to witness this implosion so fast.  I brought this up after Kamala pretended Biden was Bull Connor in the debate, but when do white people starting fleeing this party? 

 

[rockaction]

but when do white people starting fleeing this party? 

Political pluralisms run deep. It used to be "enter feminists, exit Catholics" was the catch phrase, but it never quite lived up to its billing. 

 

[skol asylum]

I'm voting for Tom Kirkman.

 

[lazyike]

Need I remind you what happened the last time we put up as boring centrist against Trump?

I'm just gonna go ahead and vote for whoever best represents my interests as usual.

She didn't lose because she was a centrist. she was boring with no personality and a beaten by a  bully who controlled too many simple minds with lies.

 

[rockaction]

and a beaten a bully

?

Did you mean to say "and she got beaten by a bully..."

 

[Alex P Keaton]

But he did. Look at the polling. His numbers went down initially and now they've gone back up. He lost a tiny bit of ground, but significantly he support among Blacks and in South Carolina hasn't moved. Biden wasn't great but he did what he had to. He held serve for now. 

He got crushed.  Destroyed.  He's been on the ropes ever since.  Amazing that you are so intellectually stubborn.

 

[timschochet]

He got crushed.  Destroyed.  He's been on the ropes ever since.  Amazing that you are so intellectually stubborn.

The polling certainly doesn’t show he’s on the ropes. He remains the favorite. Apparently Las Vegas is as “intellectually stubborn” as I am. 

 

[rockaction]

Biden had a rough couple of weeks according to narrative, is just fine according to polls. What do you put stock in? is the question for all of us.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

The polling certainly doesn’t show he’s on the ropes. He remains the favorite. Apparently Las Vegas is as “intellectually stubborn” as I am. 

You do realize that a) getting crushed in the debate and b) still being ahead in the polls aren't mutually exclusive things at this stage, no?

 

[lazyike]

?

Did you mean to say "and she got beaten by a bully..."

yes

 

[timschochet]

You do realize that a) getting crushed in the debate and b) still being ahead in the polls aren't mutually exclusive things at this stage, no?

I didn’t think he did well in the debate. I didn’t think he was exactly crushed, but that’s a subjective opinion (focus groups ranked him 3rd or 4th of 20 in both debates which is not exactly being crushed.) 

But when I wrote he “held serve”’ what I meant is that he maintained his lead. That’s what turned out to have happened. 

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I didn’t think he did well in the debate. I didn’t think he was exactly crushed, but that’s a subjective opinion (focus groups ranked him 3rd or 4th of 20 in both debates which is not exactly being crushed.) 

But when I wrote he “held serve”’ what I meant is that he maintained his lead. That’s what turned out to have happened. 

Ok.  Disagree with your view but appreciate the perspective.  Thanks for clarifying what it meant to hold serve.

I haven't seen any debate analysis that had him 4th of 20.  

 

[timschochet]

Ok.  Disagree with your view but appreciate the perspective.  Thanks for clarifying what it meant to hold serve.

I haven't seen any debate analysis that had him 4th of 20.  

https://www.google.com/amp/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2019/06/debate-live-polling-good-news-for-harris-warrenand-biden.html

 

[Alex P Keaton]

https://www.google.com/amp/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2019/06/debate-live-polling-good-news-for-harris-warrenand-biden.html

Good stuff.  It didn't say that Biden performed 4th out of 20 though.  

"After the first night, Warren and Booker ended with the highest approval ratings; after the second, Biden and Harris led."

-- that isn't the same as what you said.  It means something completely different.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I didn’t think he did well in the debate. I didn’t think he was exactly crushed, but that’s a subjective opinion (focus groups ranked him 3rd or 4th of 20 in both debates which is not exactly being crushed.) 

But when I wrote he “held serve”’ what I meant is that he maintained his lead. That’s what turned out to have happened. 

538 has a view on the primary.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-weve-gleaned-about-the-democratic-primary-from-6-months-of-polls/

 

[timschochet]

Good stuff.  It didn't say that Biden performed 4th out of 20 though.  

"After the first night, Warren and Booker ended with the highest approval ratings; after the second, Biden and Harris led."

-- that isn't the same as what you said.  It means something completely different.

Not completely different. 

I heard the 4th place ranking from Steve Kornacki on TV but I can’t find an article to go with it. Still this is close enough. My point is that your view that he was crushed and on the ropes isn’t necessarily a general attitude. That doesn’t mean you’re wrong though. 

 

[NCCommish]

I don't generally like to nitpick a post but this is where you are dead wrong. Maybe not in terms of fundamental rights but most definitely in terms of social programs.

The vast majority of current progressive programs require massive amounts of federal funds...the younger generations have no clue how to operate in an environment of financial scarcity. 

There will be no "progressive triumph." Once the unfunded liabilities and national debt cause the economy to implode it will take the progressive movement right along with it.

Yeah this is full of wrong. First they already are dealing with financial scarcity with nothing to show for it 

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Not completely different. 

I heard the 4th place ranking from Steve Kornacki on TV but I can’t find an article to go with it. Still this is close enough. My point is that your view that he was crushed and on the ropes isn’t necessarily a general attitude. That doesn’t mean you’re wrong though. 

Fair enough.

Another good article here paints a more dire picture for Bernie than for Biden:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/second-place-in-the-democratic-primary-is-crowded-thats-not-good-for-sanders/

 

[rockaction]

I'm just thanking the authorities-that-be today that Hillary Clinton never became president.

 

[PhantomJB]

Yeah this is full of wrong. First they already are dealing with financial scarcity with nothing to show for it 

You got nothing.

If younger generations can't even handle their own student debt without crying for a bailout then fat chance they're going to be able to figure out a national debt crisis.

 

[rockaction]

You got nothing.

If younger generations can't even handle their own student debt without crying for a bailout then fat chance they're going to be able to figure out a national debt crisis.

Wait until they try to support the elderly at their birth rate levels. That's always a fun thought. 

 

[PhantomJB]

Wait until they try to support the elderly at their birth rate levels. That's always a fun thought. 

Agreed. Compounded by longer lifespans. I've seen firsthand some of the Medicare bills for the 80+ crowd. Yikes. 

 

[NCCommish]

Agreed. Compounded by longer lifespans. I've seen firsthand some of the Medicare bills for the 80+ crowd. Yikes. 

Wouldn't it be nice to live in an advanced country where that wasn't a worry? You know like the entire rest of the first world countries. 

 

[NCCommish]

You got nothing.

If younger generations can't even handle their own student debt without crying for a bailout then fat chance they're going to be able to figure out a national debt crisis.

You can't even compare what student debt is now to what it was and you can't compare the pay now to what it was. I see ads all the time paying 15 an hour and wanting a 4 year degree. I got nothing? You got less.

 

[KiddLattimer]

You can't even compare what student debt is now to what it was and you can't compare the pay now to what it was. I see ads all the time paying 15 an hour and wanting a 4 year degree. I got nothing? You got less.

$15.29 an hour, masters degree preferred

 

[PhantomJB]

You can't even compare what student debt is now to what it was and you can't compare the pay now to what it was. I see ads all the time paying 15 an hour and wanting a 4 year degree. I got nothing? You got less.

$15.29 an hour, masters degree preferred

All that says is how incredibly financially stupid someone was for pursuing a master's degree in that field.

The average U.S. pay without a high school diploma is $24K/yr ($12/hr). Earned over six years...that equates to $144K gross pay.

In that same six-year timeframe, your master's student buddy just spent on average $25K/yr for undergrad + $30K/yr for grad school. Total = ($160K)

At the end of six years the non-high school graduate is already $304,000 ahead of the master's student.

At a pay difference of $3/hr per year, it will now take 51 years for the master's student financial wiz to make up the lost ground.

Let's just hope the master's degree wasn't in finance.

 

[timschochet]

Thanks to Donald Trump’s racism, I believe we’re getting closer to the unity we need. 

 

[NCCommish]

Thanks to Donald Trump’s racism, I believe we’re getting closer to the unity we need. 

Are you serious? Did you see what the official Democratic Twitter account tweeted yesterday?

 

[timschochet]

Are you serious? Did you see what the official Democratic Twitter account tweeted yesterday?

I didn’t. I doubt it will change my perspective though. 

 

[NCCommish]

I didn’t. I doubt it will change my perspective though. 

They used a racist attack on AOC. And I don't really care if it changes your prospective it did reaffirm mine. The Democrats would rather lose to Trump while they attack the left than win with a candidate like Bernie or Warren. Because money. Because they are corrupted. But there is only one way to fix that and we're working on it.