AAABatteries
Footballguy
And FTR, I don’t think Bernie is getting screwed but it doesn’t mean I like where the 2-party system has taken us.
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)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
Thunderlips
Footballguy
If Warren bows out, pushes her people to support Bernie, endorses him and goes on the campaign trail with him....is that wrong?
Last edited by a moderator:
Thunderlips
Footballguy
I think the narrative of the DNC not being on his side has been one that comes from The Right more than The Left. It's pretty funny how The Right is claiming foul in regards to the DNC Primary. Why do you think that?
The Narrator
Footballguy
So because political parties are not neutral I shouldn't be able to have an opinion? I don't follow.
The Narrator
Footballguy
No. Warren can do whatever she wants and it's not wrong. She gets to decide what her campaign does.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
I think one questions whether it is in the best interests of the Bernie Bros or Bernie (as a 3rd Party alternative) to burn down the Party that is closest to them in ideology.
Curious - in many countries where they have a multi-party system, there is not a direct election of the head of government.
How would a multi-party system play out here?
Labor - 28%
Conservatives - 25 %
Dems - 20%
Libertarians - 20%
Green - 5%
Other - 2%
(Just making up numbers and parties) - but lets say the respective Presidential candidates get that percentage of vote. (either nationally or in an individual state)
Does the Labor candidate become President with 28% of the vote? Or is there a run-off with the top-2? (effectively creating a two-party race)
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Because Trump would rather face off against Sanders since he knows more Americans opposes Socialism and Sanders won't be able to draw enough moderates to the polls to vote for him. It's a much easier path back to the WH for Trump if he can spend a few months turning the election into Capitalism vs. Socialism. Trump will never get any of Sanders people to vote for him. Trump will have a harder time getting moderates to vote for him instead of Biden/Bloomberg than he would Sanders.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
By doing what?
The fewer candidates, the easier it is for Bernie to get a majority. I saw Sanders surrogates explicitly say that when arguing that the field needed to narrow.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
I mean, Julian Castro endorsed Warren after dropping out. Bill diBlasio endorsed Bernie. I don’t see how this is any different.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
Is there any doubt that the timing was great for Pete? He got an entire news cycle where people praised him and his campaign for showing grace and leadership. A final brand buff for a 38 year-old guy who’s real prospects are in 2022 or beyond.
Im sure he had people suggest he do it to stop Bernie, but had to have known that time was coming for a while.
Klobuchar was just about to lose her home state when her entire argument was that she could win those states.
Gustavo Fring
Footballguy
Stopping Bernie is the best chance the democrats have in this election. Trump will win in a landslide if Biden isn't the nominee.
jm192
Footballguy
At this point, I think it's more likely she's staying in to draw votes off of him.
The Narrator
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
jm192
Footballguy
I don't know what your point has to do with mine.
Are you arguing Warren has a real chance? I can't prove you wrong, but I think after tonight she'll be out. And I think it makes a lot of sense to go ahead and be out. BUT: If she drops, her supporters will almost assuredly swing to Bernie.
ren hoek
Footballguy
The Narrator
Footballguy
I'm arguing we'll know a lot more about what her chances look like later this week and it's too early to expect anyone to drop out.
jm192
Footballguy
I mean...Klobuchar and Buttigeg dropped out in the last few days. So it seems like the perfectly appropriate time to expect peopole to drop out.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
They were both polling not to reach their thresholds to receive any delegates in most states (particularly California). Latest projections have Warren and Bloomberg possibly winning 200+ Delegates apiece today. Because of the 15% cutoff, that’s a fluid number. Underperforming just a bit would be disastrous, but Pete and Amy weren’t looking at the same upside.
Ok. But you also have to remember on our board it's "Dickies" replying to "snotbubble"
I'm not sure how reflective that is.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Usually there's an alotted time for the plurality winner to form a coalition with enough other parties to get to a majority.
Those governments tend to be crazy unstable. Israel is holding it's fourth election in close succession for example.
And the "shady" horse trading can be even crazier.
Last edited by a moderator:
roadkill1292
Footballguy
This is a rabbit hole I could disappear into for
Right - but in those governments, the people essentially elect the legislative branch, and then the legislative branch chooses its head of government - so you could form coalitions in parliament - leading to a specific PM.
But, when you directly (humor me) elect the president - you can't easily build a coalition for one position. What would you do when you lose the support of the coalition? Hold a new election?
It would be very difficult to hold a multi-party Presidential election, where you have relatively equal strength support spread among 3 or 4 parties.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Right. Very hard. The electoral college gets around some of that, but ultimately the two party system is a feature, not a bug.
roadkill1292
Footballguy
I don't agree with this conclusion at all and after the country's dissolution the new northeastern and Pacific coast nations will adapt something much closer to European style governments than to our current one. The current one will remain in effect in Red Nation, although with less enfranchisement.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
The only problem with the two party system is it's usually two parties I have no interest in going to.
A couple thoughts:AAABatteries said:
First, why didn't it happen sooner? Because they were still holding out hope before SC, and the results there pretty clearly established that Amy and Pete had no path to the nomination. As to why they would all act at the same time, I would guess that the prospect of beating Trump in November tends to clarify the stakes, and the fact that so many states are voting today gives it a level of urgency. Before this latest Biden resurgence, there seemed to be a real possibility that Bernie would amass an insurmountable lead today and be unstoppable. If there were only one primary today, you might not have seen such a rush of dropouts.
As for whether the DNC "convinced" anyone, as I said upthread, it really depends on what we're talking about here. Would I believe that Tom Perez called each of them and said that they should think long and hard about their chances of winning the nomination, and whether staying in the race will produce the result they want? Sure, that may have happened. (Then again, they might have figured that out on their own; it was pretty obvious after Saturday). But if you're telling me that Perez showed up at their campaign HQ with a couple oversized goons and said, "Nice political future ya got there, Pete. Be a shame if anything happened to it", then no, I don't buy it. I just don't think that Perez or anyone else in the amorphous "Democratic Establishment" has that kind of juice. If Pete or Amy wanted to stay in, they could have stayed in.
So yes, whether or not anyone nudged them in that direction, I believe that both Amy and Pete decided on their own that it made sense to drop out. Like I said, assuming they don't want Bernie to win, that pretty clearly is the right long-term move for them, so why would it be so hard to believe they would figure it out independently?
Last edited by a moderator:
-OZ-
Footballguy
BassNBrew
Footballguy
You guys keep saying this, but poll after poll suggests quite the opposite. Winning over a few independents does nothing if your base isn't motivated to take the trouble to vote. I spent an hour today to vote for Bernie. I wouldn't cross the street to vote for Biden.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
I’m neither advocating nor condoning it - I just don’t think you can throw the “that’s the rules, deal with it” and then complain about people voting however they want - that’s also the rules. You make your own bed. And to repeat - I neither advocate nor condone it - I’ll be voting for the D nominee even if it’s Bloomberg or by some miracle Warren.
The Narrator
Footballguy
I would vote for the rotting carcass of Richard Nixon if he managed to be the D nominee.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Sander will get his progressive cultists to come vote, what he won't do motivate the moderate Dem to go out to the polls and vote for Socialism. It's one thing to answer a polling question about how you're going to vote, it's quite another to actually go out and vote. In March 2016 Clinton was ahead of Trump by 10 points in almost every single poll. She was still ahead in November polling by 3-5 points. She just didn't motivate people outside her base to vote. Sanders will have the same problems.
Jefferson the Caregiver
Rebel Without A Pause
Warren is still actively asking for donations, not getting the sense she is on the verge of dropping out. We will see. I don't want her to win but I'm good with her staying in it. Might send her another token.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
I think Sanders' is about those people who AREN"T voting finally getting a voice speaking for and championing for them. To that, if everyone in this country was forced to vote.....I think he'd probably win walking away.
That being said, those people (who I do think he needs because his hardcore base isnt' big enough to offset some voters who will either stay at home or vote for Trump) are unreliable.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
This is why I think it’s misguided to use our experience to predict how Bernie would do. I get the sense that people who never voted may vote for him - also, people fed up with politicians may trade Trump for Bernie. I wouldn’t bet on it but that seems possible.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Yeah, I mean, they don't vote. So appealing to the people that don't vote still gets you ZERO votes.
-OZ-
Footballguy
Great. Let's put the guy in office who people who aren't motivated to do #### want.
Anyone other than Trump.
Anyone except Trump over Bernie.
Thunderlips
Footballguy
They're unreliable. It doesn't mean they WON'T. There's a lot of risk.....that could result in Trump taking 300+EVs again. But that risk could also result in Bernie winning and, at the least, a fundamental change in the DNC.Yeah, I mean, they don't vote. So appealing to the people that don't vote still gets you ZERO votes.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Agree. As you can see from Super Tuesday, Sanders dominated the young voter demographics and Biden dominated the older voter demographics. Unfortunately for Sanders, the young voters didn't turn out (and probably won't in a general) in large enough numbers to push Sanders to wins but the older voters do go out and vote. Sanders also did not perform well enough with black voters (already mentioned he wouldn't in a previous post). Like I said yesterday, Sanders just doesn't motivate people outside his base to show up and vote for him.
At this point, I don't think any of the Democratic Presidential candidates can win the general election so it's more about putting a safer guy at the top of the ticket so you don't lose out on down ticket votes.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
It’s likely just self-interested pragmatism. If they want any future in the Democratic Party, then it helps to endorse an actual Democrat, as opposed to a guy who isn’t an actual party member.
Not particularly. I think it was mostly a function of the calendar. Late Saturday night it became clear that they would both have to drop out, and slightly more than 48 hours later there was a huge number of races that could have allowed Bernie to put the race away.
Like I said, I'm sure there was "coordination" in terms of hustling to get them all on a stage together before the primaries. But I don't think it was anything nefarious.
Thanks. I do find it super interesting.
And for sure, as I said in the OP, I don't find anything nefarious. I have zero problem if Biden called up Buttigieg and said, "drop out and you have this spot in my team". That's deal making. That's not nefarious.
I actually give Biden a credit there for being able to make it happen.
It takes a non normal amount of ego to run for President. Quitting before the biggest day is odd at best. I'm not just ok with there being more to it. I give Biden positive points for it.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
As someone with zero athletic ability when I play a sport of some kind I kind of expect to get beat and can deal with that, but I just can't stand to lose (i.e. lose for some reason other than my athletic short comings). When I listen to elite athlete they are just the opposite. They seem to be relatively okay with losing but just don't tell them someone else got the better of them. The best you can hope for is that "they were the better team today".
I think the same thing is happening here. It is far better for these "non normal ego"s to quit than to face the prospects of getting beat soundly. And to be honest I think the bigger prizes on Super Tuesday made this normal realization happen later this year than normal. Usually this drop out happens a couple of weeks earlier.
Can you expand on that - within the context of this race?
I don't find it odd at all. I was very disappointed when I saw the alert - but I knew the math, and Pete's path to the nomination had closed. Pete made a very mature decision - but it really would not have been difficult to make. Staying in the race would have led to a sub-optimal outcome (from Pete's perspective) - he chose the optimal path, for himself personally, as well as his preferred politics.
Once Pete dropped out, Amy had no reason to stay in - she was much further behind than Pete - so, again, I saw it as a perfectly logical decision, even before you factor in any goodwill, or other leverage, she got from the DNC.
