2020 Elections

[O Really]

They seem terrified of Bernie.

The corporate wing of the Dem Party will not tolerate effective opposition.

Or doesn't want to run a candidate who has an excellent chance of losing - ironically for the same reason that Trump has an excellent chance of losing. Bernie's! problem is that he doesn't play well with others. He's generally trashed the Democratic party in general, and has offered no expectation of an effort to attract new supporters. The supporters he does have are enthusiastic and ardent, like Trump's, but the crowd isn't getting any bigger. Add all the "socialist" baggage, and getting a Dem elected is harder than it needs to be.
Kos explains it better than I...
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/3 ... of-support

[Vrede too]

They seem terrified of Bernie.

The corporate wing of the Dem Party will not tolerate effective opposition.

Or doesn't want to run a candidate who has an excellent chance of losing - ironically for the same reason that Trump has an excellent chance of losing. Bernie's! problem is that he doesn't play well with others. He's generally trashed the Democratic party in general, and has offered no expectation of an effort to attract new supporters. The supporters he does have are enthusiastic and ardent, like Trump's, but the crowd isn't getting any bigger. Add all the "socialist" baggage, and getting a Dem elected is harder than it needs to be.
Kos explains it better than I...
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/3 ... of-support

There's not necessarily a contradiction between Dem Party corporatism and the lack of support for Bernie!

[O Really]

They seem terrified of Bernie.

The corporate wing of the Dem Party will not tolerate effective opposition.

Or doesn't want to run a candidate who has an excellent chance of losing - ironically for the same reason that Trump has an excellent chance of losing. Bernie's! problem is that he doesn't play well with others. He's generally trashed the Democratic party in general, and has offered no expectation of an effort to attract new supporters. The supporters he does have are enthusiastic and ardent, like Trump's, but the crowd isn't getting any bigger. Add all the "socialist" baggage, and getting a Dem elected is harder than it needs to be.
Kos explains it better than I...
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/3 ... of-support

There's not necessarily a contradiction between Dem Party corporatism and the lack of support for Bernie!

Not necessarily, but can we agree that even the Dem Party corporatism people want to win the effin' election? Problem is, any of the former or remaining candidates could theoretically beat Trump on a given day, or not. No way of knowing for sure. But if you could know - if you knew 100% who could win and who couldn't, and if Bernie! was the one who could win, garontee the "establishment" would suck it up and put on their Bernie! Beanie!

It's a good sign that the Dems seem to have learned from the Repug mess in 2016 where all the high-ego jerks stayed in long past their time and let Trump keep benefiting from a fractured vote instead of getting out and getting behind somebody else.

[Vrede too]

Not necessarily, but can we agree that even the Dem Party corporatism people want to win the effin' election? Problem is, any of the former or remaining candidates could theoretically beat Trump on a given day, or not. No way of knowing for sure. But if you could know - if you knew 100% who could win and who couldn't, and if Bernie! was the one who could win, garontee the "establishment" would suck it up and put on their Bernie! Beanie!

Trying to set aside my ideological bias, I'm still not convinced that Joe is the champion or even most likely champion we need. There are reasons that Dems have twice rejected him for POTUS. This is a good part of the reason that I'm somewhat comfortable voting my ideological bias.

It's a good sign that the Dems seem to have learned from the Repug mess in 2016 where all the high-ego jerks stayed in long past their time and let Trump keep benefiting from a fractured vote instead of getting out and getting behind somebody else.

You seem to be counting chickens before their Super Tuesday hatch date.

[O Really]

You seem to be counting chickens before their Super Tuesday hatch date.

[/quote]
Not really. Pete, Tom, and Amy really did bail. Who knows where their votes will go. I've seen some Pete voters headed for Bernie! Bloomberg is an unknown factor for now. But regardless of the ST result, bailing is better than hopelessly staying in out of ego.

[Vrede too]

Not really. Pete, Tom, and Amy really did bail. Who knows where their votes will go. I've seen some Pete voters headed for Bernie! Bloomberg is an unknown factor for now. But regardless of the ST result, bailing is better than hopelessly staying in out of ego.

My bad. I read into your post a conclusion about what will happen that isn't really there. Sorry.

[O Really]

Trying to set aside my ideological bias, I'm still not convinced that Joe is the champion or even most likely champion we need. There are reasons that Dems have twice rejected him for POTUS. This is a good part of the reason that I'm somewhat comfortable voting my ideological bias.[/color]

Biden isn't an ideal candidate, and in "normal" times has shown not even to be a particularly good candidate against some stiff competition. And he's a bit boring. But isn't "boring" a positive trait after several years of Trump drama? Does it not make sense that for everybody that's just sick and tired of Trump a bland candidate would have a better chance of getting the muddling vote than just another lightening rod from a different direction?

Right now, Trump is comfortably behind a "generic democrat" and trails to some extent from all real candidates except for Pete (who is no longer there). What that tells me is that the Dems can't help winning unless they screw up, which of course we all know they're capable of doing. Last election was close enough that any one of several factors could have been the last straw, but it certainly didn't help that Hillary was so hated by so many. Anybody with at least a neutral view of her probably would have gone her way. So if the top objective is winning (getting rid of Trump), why would you run an inexperienced gay guy or a polarizing curmudgeon socialist who doesn't even claim to be a Democrat?

[Vrede too]

Speaking of bias, I decided to check my potential one with a tally before going out to vote (original on previous page). Keeping in mind that in some races I'm not given a choice or I think that there's a clearly superior candidate:

White male: 3
Elderly White male: 1
White female: 3
Black female: 1

Dem ballot
All my picks, so that I can gloat or cry about them Wed am....

POTUS
With the NC polls so tight at the top and winning even a slight plurality apparently mattering a lot, I’m abandoning Liz! and voting for Bernie! (old White male)
The only race that I know of where a gay is running, but he dropped out.

Superintendent of Public Instruction
https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_ ... tion,_2020

1. Jen Mangrum (White female)
2. Keith Sutton
Both better than their opponents. I'm okay with it if Sutton wins. I may even switch to him so that my ballot isn't quite so White.
Okay, I'll go with Keith Sutton since I'm not voting for other Black males.

Treasurer
https://ballotpedia.org/North_Carolina_ ... tion,_2020

1. Ronnie Chatterji
2. Dimple Ajmera
I'm okay with it if Dimple wins.
My gender balance is pretty good. I'll stick with the Asian male over the Asian female.

NC State Senate District 48
https://ballotpedia.org/Najah_Underwood
The incumbent Repug, Chuck Edwards, really really sucks, and will be reelected.

1. Brian Caskey, because of the anecdote he chose to share. (White male)
2. Cristal Figueroa
Both better than their opponent. I'm okay with it if Figueroa wins.
Okay, I'll go with Cristal Figueroa, maybe the only Latinx I have to choose from in any race.

I do believe in best person for the job, but society is enhanced when we choose diversity at the margins. Dem state senators will pretty much do the same thing as each other, and struggling Black students can be inspired by a Black as top Ed official.

New tally:

White male: 3
Elderly White male: 1
White female: 3
Black female: 1
Black male: 1
Asian male: 1
Latina: 1 (she also qualifies as White, but I'll keep her distinct).

6 males, 5 females
7 Whites, 4 nonWhites
1 elderly
Could be worse.

[Vrede too]

Biden isn't an ideal candidate, and in "normal" times has shown not even to be a particularly good candidate against some stiff competition. And he's a bit boring. But isn't "boring" a positive trait after several years of Trump drama? Does it not make sense that for everybody that's just sick and tired of Trump a bland candidate would have a better chance of getting the muddling vote than just another lightening rod from a different direction?

Right now, Trump is comfortably behind a "generic democrat" and trails to some extent from all real candidates except for Pete (who is no longer there). What that tells me is that the Dems can't help winning unless they screw up, which of course we all know they're capable of doing. Last election was close enough that any one of several factors could have been the last straw, but it certainly didn't help that Hillary was so hated by so many. Anybody with at least a neutral view of her probably would have gone her way. So if the top objective is winning (getting rid of Trump), why would you run an inexperienced gay guy or a polarizing curmudgeon socialist who doesn't even claim to be a Democrat?

Because a polarizing curmudgeon socialist who doesn't even claim to be a Democrat MIGHT win when a bit boring, bland, not even a particularly good candidate will lose, or they will both win vs 45SHOLE and the former is a chance to break away a little bit from our corporatist status quo.

This mirrors pretty closely our debate from 4 years ago, though you were more enthusiastic about Hillary than you are Joe, and I was more enthusiastic about 4 years younger Bernie! Too bad that Bernie! and Liz! sucked all of the progressive oxygen out of the room. A younger one winning delegates would have been nice.

My crystal ball is cloudier than yours. I honestly don't know who's most likely to still have a pulse in Nov, let alone beat IMPOSPOTUS. Until one of them screws up royally or I find an actual psychic, I'll leave the electoral predictions to folks with more certainty than I have. This is somewhat liberating in that is lets me go with my heart.

[O Really]

Maybe Biden doesn't have rabid fans. But other than the diehard Trumpers that nobody affect, nobody hates him. Nobody is particularly afraid of him. He has very little "real" baggage that could be weaponized against him. Hillary was a flawed candidate, particularly in retrospect, and Trump was an attractive nuisance, unknown as to how he would really govern. More people in 2016 willing to take a chance on "something new", no "politics as usual" "clean the swamp" yada. Now Trump is known and despised far and wide by all but his cult. Biden is boring, but somewhat comforting like a soft blanket. I think that makes him a desirable candidate for a lot of people - particularly a lot of the people that might have said "oh what the hell" and voted for Trump in 2016 but have buyers remorse. Or those that jumped the Dem ship because they hated Hillary. As I've said, I'd vote for a three-legged chipmunk not named Trump, and maybe that's what Biden is, but I still think he has the best chance (out of others with good chances).

[Vrede too]

Maybe Biden doesn't have rabid fans. But other than the diehard Trumpers that nobody affect, nobody hates him. Nobody is particularly afraid of him. He has very little "real" baggage that could be weaponized against him. Hillary was a flawed candidate, particularly in retrospect, and Trump was an attractive nuisance, unknown as to how he would really govern. More people in 2016 willing to take a chance on "something new", no "politics as usual" "clean the swamp" yada. Now Trump is known and despised far and wide by all but his cult. Biden is boring, but somewhat comforting like a soft blanket. I think that makes him a desirable candidate for a lot of people - particularly a lot of the people that might have said "oh what the hell" and voted for Trump in 2016 but have buyers remorse. Or those that jumped the Dem ship because they hated Hillary. As I've said, I'd vote for a three-legged chipmunk not named Trump, and maybe that's what Biden is, but I still think he has the best chance (out of others with good chances).

Your endorsement is so strong and lacking in nuance!

Did you give up on Bloomberg? If you're convinced that Joe is most likely to win, I don't fault you for voting for him a bit. Devil's advocate re Joe's baggage:

Ukraine still. Not that there was actual corruption especially involving Joe, but it sure looks like Hunter was trading on his last name.
Black only by association with Obama.
Lies like about Stop-and-Frisk and arrested in South Africa.
Creepy handsy Joe.
Iraq War vote.
Countless verbal gaffes like 'lying dog-faced pony soldier'.

Vote for the three-legged chipmunk would make an eye-catching, though perhaps not winning bumper sticker .

Aside: Back when bunches of prominent people including US House members were getting arrested at the South African embassy in DC I attended a town hall given by our mod/con Dem US Senator. I asked if he was going to get arrested, too. He said 'No' and said snootily that no Senators had been arrested. I replied, "One has, Lowell Weicker," pause for effect, "A Republican. The room erupted in "Oooohs" and laughter.

[O Really]

No, I think Bloomberg might very well be a big factor. Not necessarily winning the nomination, but suppose he gets a significant number of delegates and neither Bernie! or Biden get a majority. He'd likely get to crown the nominee himself. And of the candidates, I think Bloomberg might very well be the best President if he got elected, and he could probably beat Trump too. Problem is, he's not that likeable and a lot of people are hung up on the "buying the Presidency" idea as well as associating him with corporate evilness and bad behaviour. And who else is associated with such things? Oh, the hated guy in the White House, for one. So Bloomberg gets somewhat of a frying pan-fire type aura. But if his selection of Cabinet members and agency heads as President would be anything at all like his selection and use of advertising/communications people, he'd be an outstanding President.

Every time there some issue comes up, they've got a point-on ad for it. I thought it was a good one that focused on "Mike... gets it done...action not talk..." and ends "so for President, would you rather have a debater or a doer?"

[Vrede too]

No, I think Bloomberg might very well be a big factor. Not necessarily winning the nomination, but suppose he gets a significant number of delegates and neither Bernie! or Biden get a majority. He'd likely get to crown the nominee himself. And of the candidates, I think Bloomberg might very well be the best President if he got elected, and he could probably beat Trump too. Problem is, he's not that likeable and a lot of people are hung up on the "buying the Presidency" idea as well as associating him with corporate evilness and bad behaviour. And who else is associated with such things? Oh, the hated guy in the White House, for one. So Bloomberg gets somewhat of a frying pan-fire type aura. But if his selection of Cabinet members and agency heads as President would be anything at all like his selection and use of advertising/communications people, he'd be an outstanding President.

Every time there some issue comes up, they've got a point-on ad for it. I thought it was a good one that focused on "Mike... gets it done...action not talk..." and ends "so for President, would you rather have a debater or a doer?"

Which are you going with today, Bloomberg or Biden?

[O Really]

Devil's advocate re Joe's baggage:

Ukraine still. Not that there was actual corruption especially involving Joe, but it sure looks like Hunter was trading on his last name.
Black only by association with Obama.
Lies like about Stop-and-Frisk and arrested in South Africa.
Creepy handsy Joe.
Iraq War vote.
Countless verbal gaffes like 'lying dog-faced pony soldier'.

Sure in times past those things could sting, but they all pale in comparison to what we've all (regrettably) gotten accustomed to in the past three years. All the candidates have warts, but all are far better than the incumbent*.

[O Really]

Which are you going with today, Bloomberg or Biden?

I already voted for Bloomberg. Glad I didn't go early for Pete or Tom.

[Vrede too]

Young, long-haired guy outside the poll . . . campaigning for Tulsi! I told him that I didn't know she was still running . He said that she's a soldier, she won't give up the fight. I resisted the urge to point out that modern US soldiers ONLY fight when they have overwhelming odds of victory. I asked if he thought she'd get the 15% needed for delegates. I thought I detected a pause as if he didn't know about that, but maybe not. He repeated his soldier line, clearly a trained talking point, and said something about an astrophysicist at a Tulsi meeting in Asheville. Again, I resisted an urge to make a 'space case' crack. I hope he's not too sad when she only gets 2% or less in NC.

[neoplacebo]

Young, long-haired guy outside the poll . . . campaigning for Tulsi! I told him that I didn't know she was still running . He said that she's a soldier, she won't give up the fight. I resisted the urge to point out that modern US soldiers ONLY fight when they have overwhelming odds of victory. I asked if he thought she'd get the 15% needed for delegates. I thought I detected a pause as if he didn't know about that, but maybe not. He repeated his soldier line, clearly a trained talking point, and said something about an astrophysicist at a Tulsi meeting in Asheville. Again, I resisted an urge to make a 'space case' crack. I hope he's not too sad when she only gets 2% or less in NC.

I will guess that guy's girlfriend was also there doing the same thing. Nobody would be that stupid by themself.

[Vrede too]

I will guess that guy's girlfriend was also there doing the same thing. Nobody would be that stupid by themself.

Intelligence is additive but stupidity is exponential.

There were two sidewalks leading down to the poll and someone was at the top of the other one, but I didn't pay enough attention to see if they might be a team.

[O Really]

I guess it's a different mindset, but I just can't see spending time going to the polls, maybe waiting in line to vote for somebody who not only has no chance to win, but who also has no chance to make any other impact. Of course, I may have mailed in a vote for just such person, but time will tell.

[Vrede too]

I guess it's a different mindset, but I just can't see spending time going to the polls, maybe waiting in line to vote for somebody who not only has no chance to win, but who also has no chance to make any other impact. Of course, I may have mailed in a vote for just such person, but time will tell.

That is lame, but it's easy. Imagine spending ALL DAY outside a poll pushing such a candidate when almost everybody arrives knowing who they will vote for and the very few that are unsure know that they won't be voting for Tulsi .