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.

Buttigieg and Klobachur Exits - How Coordinated? (1 Viewer)

boots11234 said:
Pete comes across as preachy and condescending. As if he alone is the arbiter of truth and gods word. He’s  plastic and phony with almost zero experience.  Out of all the candidates he was by far IMO the most fake of them all.   
 

If he went against Obama’s wishes his future doesn’t look too bright. Obama has wrestled the reigns of power from Hillary’s claws and is the new king maker. 
Click to expand...
Biden thinks Pete most reminds him of his son Beau. Biggest compliment Biden can give.  :shrug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
hammerva said:
Is it shady.  Maybe.  Welcome to politics.  Frankly if the republicans did that in 2016 we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.  
Click to expand...
IMO if Bernie wants to run as a Democrat without actually being a Democrat there are tradeoffs.  This is one of them - doesn't seem shady at all to me.

 
-OZ- said:
That's been said so many times, but is there true evidence to show it as most likely true? 

I can't speak for others, but my voting for Biden instead of trump has no bearing on whether I vote for D or R for Congress. (Not that it matters much here anyway, it takes unique circumstances to get a D into Congress in Alabama)

Honestly, I've intentionally voted opposite for Congress vs president more often than a straight ticket, but that's just me.
Click to expand...
No, but I don't think you'd find such data right now. I think there is a 0% chance of the senate flipping blue if Bernie were the nom -and I think there is a nonzero chance of the house turning back to red. If Biden were to get the nom then I think there is a 0% chance of the house flipping red and a nonzero chance of the senate turning blue. Is this particular non zero 5-10%? or 20-30? :shrug:  Need more data to analyze.

 
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
I agree.  We're all guessing.  Until I saw 538's latest thoughts on the post-SC polling I was just going to vote my heart today.  But I think giving someone momentum and a clear lead in this thing is worth taking a shot at.  FWIW, if I had evidence Sanders was that guy I'd have voted Sanders.
Click to expand...
Mostly I agree, but at least from what I hear and makes sense to me - Bernie would be more likely to energize people to vote against him. Maybe he'd also get more people to vote for him. Biden is more the "meh" candidate. Most could live with a Biden presidency, whereas Trump and Sanders get more opposing their candidacy. 

 
This is all a reach.  Pete and Amy were not winning.  They could not crack 5% of the black vote.  South Carolina determined this not a backroom deal.

They dropped out to help themselves not to screw Bernie.  

 
Daywalker said:
This is all a reach.  Pete and Amy were not winning.  They could not crack 5% of the black vote.  South Carolina determined this not a backroom deal.

They dropped out to help themselves not to screw Bernie.  
Click to expand...
Of course it’s a backroom deal.  When multiple candidates who’ve spent the past year running a campaign are now falling in line in unison behind the party’s chosen candidate a day before Super Tuesday.  

You can say it’s to “help themselves,” but if it’s about helping one candidate to stop another one, that sort of goes beyond just pure self-interest.  The most charitable takeaway is that they are helping themselves by working against another candidate.  That’s not democratic, it’s not normal, it’s party hacks serving out the will of their corporate partners.  

And to think people spent 3 years being credulous about Russian tweets and Russian meddling, all to normalize this election interference by the Party.  How absurd.  If Biden is the nominee they will lose to Trump, and they will deserve it. 

 
ren hoek said:
Of course it’s a backroom deal.  When multiple candidates who’ve spent the past year running a campaign are now falling in line in unison behind the party’s chosen candidate a day before Super Tuesday.  

You can say it’s to “help themselves,” but if it’s about helping one candidate to stop another one, that sort of goes beyond just pure self-interest.  The most charitable takeaway is that they are helping themselves by working against another candidate.  That’s not democratic, it’s not normal, it’s party hacks serving out the will of their corporate partners.  

And to think people spent 3 years being credulous about Russian tweets and Russian meddling, all to normalize this election interference by the Party.  How absurd.  If Biden is the nominee they will lose to Trump, and they will deserve it. 
Click to expand...
It's kind of like the Avengers coming together to fight the forces of evil

Except the forces of evil are uninsured poor people who don't want to go bankrupt or die

 
rockaction said:
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool conservative who may go out and vote in California's open primary today to get Biden to 15%. If he's getting that kind of response from someone like me, look out!
Click to expand...
I can definitely see the appeal to conservatives, moreso than the incumbent in many respects.  Biden won't mess with the tax structure and is no threat to the health care regime.  The wealth gap will be safe, wall street will be happy, and the war machine will keep rolling along nicely in a Biden presidency.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Agreed. But I don't know anyone feels too certain. Most people I know are saying it just like @Dinsy Ejotuz with "at least that's the argument". I don't know anyone who feels super certain about it. 
Click to expand...
There’s a lot of “No way Biden beats Trump” and “America will never elect a Socialist!”.  It’s nonsense.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Agreed. But I don't know anyone feels too certain. Most people I know are saying it just like @Dinsy Ejotuz with "at least that's the argument". I don't know anyone who feels super certain about it. 
Click to expand...
Anecdotally, while I was canvassing for my preferred candidate, "I just want someone who can beat trump" was the most common refrain. It wouldn't shock me if electability is the most used trait people are deciding on, even if it's nebulous. 

 
-OZ- said:
Mostly I agree, but at least from what I hear and makes sense to me - Bernie would be more likely to energize people to vote against him. Maybe he'd also get more people to vote for him. Biden is more the "meh" candidate. Most could live with a Biden presidency, whereas Trump and Sanders get more opposing their candidacy. 
Click to expand...
Or a lot over moderates (D,R,I) who don't like Trump also wouldn't vote for Bernie and stay home. 

 
mcintyre1 said:
He's been a part of the Democratic caucus since day one. He holds committee positions allocated to the Democratic party. They've used him to count as having a "majority" before. 
Click to expand...
Yes, and governing and campaigning are very different sports. Bernie is only a Democrat when he wants to run for president despite the fact that he often agrees with Democrats. 

 
-OZ- said:
Mostly I agree, but at least from what I hear and makes sense to me - Bernie would be more likely to energize people to vote against him. Maybe he'd also get more people to vote for him. Biden is more the "meh" candidate. Most could live with a Biden presidency, whereas Trump and Sanders get more opposing their candidacy. 
Click to expand...
Trying to project what other people in other states who don't agree with you will think about candidates seems to me to be the most futile exercise possible in determining who you're going to vote for. 

Vote for the person you think will make the best president. Chances are other people think they'll make the best president too. 

 
ren hoek said:
Yeah it turns out American establishment politicians can screw over democracy way harder than Putin ever dreamed possible.  
Click to expand...
Just so I get this straight. It would be undemocratic to deny Bernie the nomination if he only achieves a plurality in a crowded field, but it’s also in democratic to clear the field with over 95% the delegates still to be contested. I want a progressive candidate but that position makes no sense. 

 
The Narrator said:
Yes, and governing and campaigning are very different sports. Bernie is only a Democrat when he wants to run for president despite the fact that he often agrees with Democrats. 
Click to expand...
Same would be true of a significant chunk of Americans. 42% of all Americans identify as "independent" vs 30% as Republicans and 27% as Democrats. If anything, I find Bernie's Independent status a huge positive.

 
mcintyre1 said:
Same would be true of a significant chunk of Americans. 42% of all Americans identify as "independent" vs 30% as Republicans and 27% as Democrats. If anything, I find Bernie's Independent status a huge positive.
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing about the relative merit. I just don't see why he would expect the DNC to be on his side. Pretty obvious to me that the DNC would prefer a Democrat. 

 
The Narrator said:
I'm not arguing about the relative merit. I just don't see why he would expect the DNC to be on his side. Pretty obvious to me that the DNC would prefer a Democrat. 
Click to expand...
I think it's been pretty clear from the beginning that he (and many of his supporters) didn't expect the DNC to be "on his side" -- doesn't mean we can't be angry about it. We only get two parties. If the Dems really are the "big tent" party they've always claimed to be, they should be willing to let our part of the tent have power if the voters say we should.

 
The Narrator said:
Yes, and governing and campaigning are very different sports. Bernie is only a Democrat when he wants to run for president despite the fact that he often agrees with Democrats. 
Click to expand...
The alternative is that he runs third party and that would work out well for nobody (except the Republicans). The Democrats should be happy that he's giving them a chance to defeat him in the primary, let alone the fact that he would endorse whatever Dem beats him

 
mcintyre1 said:
I think it's been pretty clear from the beginning that he (and many of his supporters) didn't expect the DNC to be "on his side" -- doesn't mean we can't be angry about it. We only get two parties. If the Dems really are the "big tent" party they've always claimed to be, they should be willing to let our part of the tent have power if the voters say we should.
Click to expand...
All any candidate needs is a simple majority of delegates. The party absolutely will let your part of the tent have the power if you get enough votes to get a majority of delegates. 

You get what everyone else gets, you don't get to change the rules because your guy doesn't like playing by them. 

 
KiddLattimer said:
The alternative is that he runs third party and that would work out well for nobody (except the Republicans). The Democrats should be happy that he's giving them a chance to defeat him in the primary, let alone the fact that he would endorse whatever Dem beats him
Click to expand...
Yes, the dems should be thankful that Bernie won't burn everything down to get his way. Neat argument there. Can't imagine why people are nervous about giving your camp the reigns of power. 

 
The Narrator said:
Yes, the dems should be thankful that Bernie won't burn everything down to get his way. Neat argument there. Can't imagine why people are nervous about giving your camp the reigns of power. 
Click to expand...
Thoughtful response

He's the most popular politician in the country, millions of donors, thousands of volunteers and he's won 3 of 4 states with a big day likely on the horizon. Clearly a massive segment of the population believes in his message... but your "neat argument" is that he should just sit quietly on the sidelines and shut those people out?

 
mcintyre1 said:
I think it's been pretty clear from the beginning that he (and many of his supporters) didn't expect the DNC to be "on his side" -- doesn't mean we can't be angry about it. We only get two parties. If the Dems really are the "big tent" party they've always claimed to be, they should be willing to let our part of the tent have power if the voters say we should.
Click to expand...
He could have easily decided to run as something other than a Democrat.

 
KiddLattimer said:
Thoughtful response

He's the most popular politician in the country, millions of donors, thousands of volunteers and he's won 3 of 4 states with a big day likely on the horizon. Clearly a massive segment of the population believes in his message... but your "neat argument" is that he should just sit quietly on the sidelines and shut those people out?
Click to expand...
No, I'm not actually arguing any viewpoint except that Bernie's camp shouldn't feel entitled to any party support when he hasn't done anything to support the party. Which seems fairly obvious and logical to me.

I'd never argue that people should sit out. Democracy isn't a spectator sport. 

 
The Narrator said:
No, I'm not actually arguing any viewpoint except that Bernie's camp shouldn't feel entitled to any party support when he hasn't done anything to support the party. Which seems fairly obvious and logical to me.

I'd never argue that people should sit out. Democracy isn't a spectator sport. 
Click to expand...
That's fair... I may have misunderstood what you were saying.  I hear a lot of people say "he's not a democrat so he shouldn't be running in our party" which is what I was responding to.  My point was that the only other option is running third party or sitting out.  

Appolgies for the confusion

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Just so I get this straight. It would be undemocratic to deny Bernie the nomination if he only achieves a plurality in a crowded field, but it’s also in democratic to clear the field with over 95% the delegates still to be contested. I want a progressive candidate but that position makes no sense. 
Click to expand...
I think it’s undemocratic for rich corporate tycoons and political power brokers to put their thumb on the scale- and for the Democratic Party to throw all neutrality to the wind to go along with it.  They’re not even trying to hide it anymore.  

 
ren hoek said:
I think it’s undemocratic for rich corporate tycoons and political power brokers to put their thumb on the scale- and for the Democratic Party to throw all neutrality to the wind to go along with it.  They’re not even trying to hide it anymore.  
Click to expand...
They're a political party. Neutrality isn't really their thing. That's sort of how political parties work. 

 
Entirely coordinated how could you think anything less?  Why wouldn't they hang out for one more day?  Particularly Pete who won Iowa.

 
ren hoek said:
I think it’s undemocratic for rich corporate tycoons and political power brokers to put their thumb on the scale- and for the Democratic Party to throw all neutrality to the wind to go along with it.  They’re not even trying to hide it anymore.  
Click to expand...
If Sanders can’t beat Biden without others siphoning off votes he shouldn’t be the Democratic nominee.

 
jonessed said:
If Sanders can’t beat Biden without others siphoning off votes he shouldn’t be the Democratic nominee.
Click to expand...
I agree. I also happen to think that if a candidate can't get more delegates than another they also shouldn't be the Democratic nominee.

 
The Narrator said:
I'm not arguing about the relative merit. I just don't see why he would expect the DNC to be on his side. Pretty obvious to me that the DNC would prefer a Democrat. 
Click to expand...
What is more important?  Party affiliation or ideological affiliation?  Because Sanders is much more inline with the historical idea of a Democrat than Joe Biden.  

Biden fought the drug war, argued passionately to expand the prison complex, pushed us into wars, supports apartheid in Israel, lobbied for draconian immigration policy, allies himself with the giant insurance cos, will gladly sell out to corporations and banks.  

But because Biden filled out a piece of paper with the correct party ID, it is understandable that the Party abandons any semblance of an actual ideology and throws in with him.  The ‘not a real Democrat’ stuff is the most vacant argument, it means literally nothing.  

 
jonessed said:
If Sanders can’t beat Biden without others siphoning off votes he shouldn’t be the Democratic nominee.
Click to expand...
Guess we’ll see how it plays out.  At this point it looks like they’re angling for a contested convention, and for the superdelegates to anoint their chosen one.  Very democratic.  

 
ren hoek said:
What is more important?  Party affiliation or ideological affiliation?  Because Sanders is much more inline with the historical idea of a Democrat than Joe Biden.

Biden fought the drug war, argued passionately to expand the prison complex, pushed us into wars, supports apartheid in Israel, lobbied for draconian immigration policy, allies himself with the giant insurance cos, will gladly sell out to corporations and banks.  

But because Biden filled out a piece of paper with the correct party ID, it is understandable that the Party abandons any semblance of an actual ideology and throws in with him.  The ‘not a real Democrat’ stuff is the most vacant argument, it means literally nothing.  
Click to expand...
Then he shouldn’t have a problem beating Biden. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jonessed said:
Then he shouldn’t have a problem beating Biden. 
Click to expand...
He probably wouldn’t if not for every Super PAC & billionaire under the sun unloading hundreds of millions of dollars to stop his candidacy.  Have you seen Joe Biden talk this year?  

 
ren hoek said:
He probably wouldn’t if not for every Super PAC & billionaire under the sun unloading hundreds of millions of dollars to stop his candidacy.  Have you seen Joe Biden talk this year?  
Click to expand...
Money has always had a part to play in politics.  Same as it ever was.  

 
mcintyre1 said:
Same would be true of a significant chunk of Americans. 42% of all Americans identify as "independent" vs 30% as Republicans and 27% as Democrats. If anything, I find Bernie's Independent status a huge positive.
Click to expand...
As an Independent I consider my political views moderate or center right. Bernie is an independent who’s views are left of most Democrats.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Hi @BigSteelThrill  As a Bernie supporter, how do you feel about Warren in the race?

From my novice viewpoint, it looks to me like Biden was able to get done in pulling Buttigieg and Klobuchar to his camp what Sanders very much needed to do with Warren. 

Do you see it that way?
Click to expand...
Joe-

The last Democratic primary Sanders went after Clinton and then had to endorsed her.  Many of his followers refused to vote for her and ended up voting 3rd party.  This time around, it looks like Warren is shielding Sanders from having to attack any of the other candidates so that if he has to endorse another candidate his followers won't vote 3rd party again.  My guess is she'll stay in the race to shield Sanders for the next debate on March 15th and then bow out.   

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

glvsav37
Hulu and the Political Ads Issue
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
Desert_Power
Desert_Power
(HULK)
Literal Fake News
Replies
21
Views
818
rockaction
rockaction
J
  • Poll
Biden Admin Impeachments: How many, against whom, causes
Replies
28
Views
567
HellToupee
HellToupee

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top