The Democratic Candidates

Hi!

I think Oprah is going to have to be VP.

Hi!

Bernie going to use the situation in Iran to hammer Biden on Iraq war vote in debate. Just a thought.🤓
My old man told me tonight that Bernie’s being paid by the Trump campaign, lol. He also said we going to war with Iran for sure. He doesn’t get out much, but he might be right.

Spiritual_Chaos

Hi! said:

My old man told me tonight that Bernie’s being paid by the Trump campaign, lol. 

Lerxst1992

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday
https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday




No real surprises here, other than perhaps that Warren polls so different in the general than Sanders, even though they have similar platforms.  My presumption is it's some combination of sexism along with the damage that Warren has taken with Native American issue.  

What the polling unfortunately displays is Americans do not want to vote for people who likely have sex with men.

You can potentially glean anything you want from this, including:
-Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have better name recognition than Warren
-The DNC voting base supports a diverse set of policies
-There are three main 'lanes' that candidates are occupying - one currently occupied by Biden, one by Sanders, and one split by Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris
-The spread of the top 3 candidates, when factoring in the +/- 3%, shows that Biden, Sanders, and Warren could potentially be tied at 46% right now (if you believe that Fox uses proper polling practices at all)
-The spread of Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris means that with a 4.5% margin error, means that one of those three candidates (Warren) could in actuality have 3.8x the votes of either of the other two (Buttigieg or Harris)
-The sum of the faith DNC voters have in aged candidates less the sum of skepticism of aged candidates is probably greater than the sum of the faith DNC voters have in younger candidates less the sum of skepticism of younger candidates  

The point I'm trying to make is one I've tried to make here countless times: trying to distill a human's decision-making process to identify one leading relevant fundamental truth that 'sealed the deal' is beyond asinine, and it's only done so that we can deliver a lazy soundbite for people to shrug their shoulders and accept, after we so boldly state the singular reason why this or that happened. 

Americans have a long track record here as compared to "humans" in other countries. 

mrussel1

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday
https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday




No real surprises here, other than perhaps that Warren polls so different in the general than Sanders, even though they have similar platforms.  My presumption is it's some combination of sexism along with the damage that Warren has taken with Native American issue.  

What the polling unfortunately displays is Americans do not want to vote for people who likely have sex with men.

You can potentially glean anything you want from this, including:
-Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have better name recognition than Warren
-The DNC voting base supports a diverse set of policies
-There are three main 'lanes' that candidates are occupying - one currently occupied by Biden, one by Sanders, and one split by Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris
-The spread of the top 3 candidates, when factoring in the +/- 3%, shows that Biden, Sanders, and Warren could potentially be tied at 46% right now (if you believe that Fox uses proper polling practices at all)
-The spread of Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris means that with a 4.5% margin error, means that one of those three candidates (Warren) could in actuality have 3.8x the votes of either of the other two (Buttigieg or Harris)
-The sum of the faith DNC voters have in aged candidates less the sum of skepticism of aged candidates is probably greater than the sum of the faith DNC voters have in younger candidates less the sum of skepticism of younger candidates  

The point I'm trying to make is one I've tried to make here countless times: trying to distill a human's decision-making process to identify one leading relevant fundamental truth that 'sealed the deal' is beyond asinine, and it's only done so that we can deliver a lazy soundbite for people to shrug their shoulders and accept, after we so boldly state the singular reason why this or that happened. 

Americans have a long track record here as compared to "humans" in other countries. 

You countered the argument against generalizing by generalizing some more.  Second, more Americans voted for a woman than a man in 2016.

Spiritual_Chaos

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday
https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday




No real surprises here, other than perhaps that Warren polls so different in the general than Sanders, even though they have similar platforms.  My presumption is it's some combination of sexism along with the damage that Warren has taken with Native American issue.  

What the polling unfortunately displays is Americans do not want to vote for people who likely have sex with men.

You can potentially glean anything you want from this, including:
-Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have better name recognition than Warren
-The DNC voting base supports a diverse set of policies
-There are three main 'lanes' that candidates are occupying - one currently occupied by Biden, one by Sanders, and one split by Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris
-The spread of the top 3 candidates, when factoring in the +/- 3%, shows that Biden, Sanders, and Warren could potentially be tied at 46% right now (if you believe that Fox uses proper polling practices at all)
-The spread of Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris means that with a 4.5% margin error, means that one of those three candidates (Warren) could in actuality have 3.8x the votes of either of the other two (Buttigieg or Harris)
-The sum of the faith DNC voters have in aged candidates less the sum of skepticism of aged candidates is probably greater than the sum of the faith DNC voters have in younger candidates less the sum of skepticism of younger candidates  

The point I'm trying to make is one I've tried to make here countless times: trying to distill a human's decision-making process to identify one leading relevant fundamental truth that 'sealed the deal' is beyond asinine, and it's only done so that we can deliver a lazy soundbite for people to shrug their shoulders and accept, after we so boldly state the singular reason why this or that happened. 

Americans have a long track record here as compared to "humans" in other countries. 

I would say voting a gay man into office would be hard in many countries. 

Spiritual_Chaos

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday
https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday




No real surprises here, other than perhaps that Warren polls so different in the general than Sanders, even though they have similar platforms.  My presumption is it's some combination of sexism along with the damage that Warren has taken with Native American issue.  

What the polling unfortunately displays is Americans do not want to vote for people who likely have sex with men.

You can potentially glean anything you want from this, including:
-Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have better name recognition than Warren
-The DNC voting base supports a diverse set of policies
-There are three main 'lanes' that candidates are occupying - one currently occupied by Biden, one by Sanders, and one split by Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris
-The spread of the top 3 candidates, when factoring in the +/- 3%, shows that Biden, Sanders, and Warren could potentially be tied at 46% right now (if you believe that Fox uses proper polling practices at all)
-The spread of Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris means that with a 4.5% margin error, means that one of those three candidates (Warren) could in actuality have 3.8x the votes of either of the other two (Buttigieg or Harris)
-The sum of the faith DNC voters have in aged candidates less the sum of skepticism of aged candidates is probably greater than the sum of the faith DNC voters have in younger candidates less the sum of skepticism of younger candidates  

The point I'm trying to make is one I've tried to make here countless times: trying to distill a human's decision-making process to identify one leading relevant fundamental truth that 'sealed the deal' is beyond asinine, and it's only done so that we can deliver a lazy soundbite for people to shrug their shoulders and accept, after we so boldly state the singular reason why this or that happened. 

Americans have a long track record here as compared to "humans" in other countries. 

You countered the argument against generalizing by generalizing some more.  Second, more Americans voted for a woman than a man in 2016.

More Americans voted for a woman than DONALD "Grab em by the pussy and mock em with nicknames like a clown" TRUMP. You think it would have been as close if it would have been a "normal man" running on the republican side?

mrussel1

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday
https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday




No real surprises here, other than perhaps that Warren polls so different in the general than Sanders, even though they have similar platforms.  My presumption is it's some combination of sexism along with the damage that Warren has taken with Native American issue.  

What the polling unfortunately displays is Americans do not want to vote for people who likely have sex with men.

You can potentially glean anything you want from this, including:
-Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have better name recognition than Warren
-The DNC voting base supports a diverse set of policies
-There are three main 'lanes' that candidates are occupying - one currently occupied by Biden, one by Sanders, and one split by Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris
-The spread of the top 3 candidates, when factoring in the +/- 3%, shows that Biden, Sanders, and Warren could potentially be tied at 46% right now (if you believe that Fox uses proper polling practices at all)
-The spread of Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris means that with a 4.5% margin error, means that one of those three candidates (Warren) could in actuality have 3.8x the votes of either of the other two (Buttigieg or Harris)
-The sum of the faith DNC voters have in aged candidates less the sum of skepticism of aged candidates is probably greater than the sum of the faith DNC voters have in younger candidates less the sum of skepticism of younger candidates  

The point I'm trying to make is one I've tried to make here countless times: trying to distill a human's decision-making process to identify one leading relevant fundamental truth that 'sealed the deal' is beyond asinine, and it's only done so that we can deliver a lazy soundbite for people to shrug their shoulders and accept, after we so boldly state the singular reason why this or that happened. 

Americans have a long track record here as compared to "humans" in other countries. 

You countered the argument against generalizing by generalizing some more.  Second, more Americans voted for a woman than a man in 2016.

More Americans voted for a woman than DONALD "Grab em by the pussy and mock em with nicknames like a clown" TRUMP. You think it would have been as close if it would have been a "normal man" running on the republican side?

I have no idea.  Presumably that Republican would have had his own set of baggage that people would have to sort out.  Would that candidate appeal to the white working class?  Would he have won PA and WI?  All we can evaluate is what actually happened.  Bernie isn't a sick fuck yet Hillary beat him by 10 points.  And this is exactly @benjs point; you cant' sort through and make assumptions about the mindset of a nation of voters. It's hubris.  

Spiritual_Chaos

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mrussel1 said:

https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday
https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSunday




No real surprises here, other than perhaps that Warren polls so different in the general than Sanders, even though they have similar platforms.  My presumption is it's some combination of sexism along with the damage that Warren has taken with Native American issue.  

What the polling unfortunately displays is Americans do not want to vote for people who likely have sex with men.

You can potentially glean anything you want from this, including:
-Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have better name recognition than Warren
-The DNC voting base supports a diverse set of policies
-There are three main 'lanes' that candidates are occupying - one currently occupied by Biden, one by Sanders, and one split by Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris
-The spread of the top 3 candidates, when factoring in the +/- 3%, shows that Biden, Sanders, and Warren could potentially be tied at 46% right now (if you believe that Fox uses proper polling practices at all)
-The spread of Warren, Buttigieg, and Harris means that with a 4.5% margin error, means that one of those three candidates (Warren) could in actuality have 3.8x the votes of either of the other two (Buttigieg or Harris)
-The sum of the faith DNC voters have in aged candidates less the sum of skepticism of aged candidates is probably greater than the sum of the faith DNC voters have in younger candidates less the sum of skepticism of younger candidates  

The point I'm trying to make is one I've tried to make here countless times: trying to distill a human's decision-making process to identify one leading relevant fundamental truth that 'sealed the deal' is beyond asinine, and it's only done so that we can deliver a lazy soundbite for people to shrug their shoulders and accept, after we so boldly state the singular reason why this or that happened. 

Americans have a long track record here as compared to "humans" in other countries. 

You countered the argument against generalizing by generalizing some more.  Second, more Americans voted for a woman than a man in 2016.

More Americans voted for a woman than DONALD "Grab em by the pussy and mock em with nicknames like a clown" TRUMP. You think it would have been as close if it would have been a "normal man" running on the republican side?

I have no idea.  Presumably that Republican would have had his own set of baggage that people would have to sort out.  Would that candidate appeal to the white working class?  Would he have won PA and WI?  All we can evaluate is what actually happened.  Bernie isn't a sick fuck yet Hillary beat him by 10 points.  And this is exactly @benjs point; you cant' sort through and make assumptions about the mindset of a nation of voters. It's hubris.  

Can still be interesting to ask and theorize about. But yes ofc.

Spiritual_Chaos

Biden got some competition. Trump raises the stakes! 

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1141156708259192833

PJPOWER

All of this “physical revolution” chatter from Biden...Makes me think he is really talking about more female bubble invading and hair sniffing.  
Let’s get physical...physical- Campaign theme song???

Hi!

Wtf is a physical revolution? Anyway, it seems the right is suggesting that he’s calling for some sort of violent confrontation when in fact he was taking a shot at Sanders rhetoric while making the case for a middle ground approach.

mrussel1

Hi! said:

Wtf is a physical revolution? Anyway, it seems the right is suggesting that he’s calling for some sort of violent confrontation when in fact he was taking a shot at Sanders rhetoric while making the case for a middle ground approach.

What he said was (and I'm paraphrasing)... People criticized me because I support working across the aisle.  Well today, we don't have a choice but to do that.  Unless you're talking about a physical revolution, our system of gov't requires two parties to come together to solve problems.  So that's what I plan to do.

Hi!

mrussel1 said:

Hi! said:

Wtf is a physical revolution? Anyway, it seems the right is suggesting that he’s calling for some sort of violent confrontation when in fact he was taking a shot at Sanders rhetoric while making the case for a middle ground approach.

What he said was (and I'm paraphrasing)... People criticized me because I support working across the aisle.  Well today, we don't have a choice but to do that.  Unless you're talking about a physical revolution, our system of gov't requires two parties to come together to solve problems.  So that's what I plan to do.

Yes, I get that. The right is playing it up like he is calling for civil war or something, taking what he said out of context. No biggie, just politics, but Biden should articulate better.

mrussel1

Hi! said:

mrussel1 said:

Hi! said:

Wtf is a physical revolution? Anyway, it seems the right is suggesting that he’s calling for some sort of violent confrontation when in fact he was taking a shot at Sanders rhetoric while making the case for a middle ground approach.

What he said was (and I'm paraphrasing)... People criticized me because I support working across the aisle.  Well today, we don't have a choice but to do that.  Unless you're talking about a physical revolution, our system of gov't requires two parties to come together to solve problems.  So that's what I plan to do.

Yes, I get that. The right is playing it up like he is calling for civil war or something, taking what he said out of context. No biggie, just politics, but Biden should articulate better.

Meh.  If you're going to worry about how the right is going to manipulate what you say, you'll never speak.  They are only preaching to the converted anyway.  No reputable news source could say that he was advocating revolution.  Any sentence can be re-constructed as a lie.  

Hi!

mrussel1 said:

Hi! said:

mrussel1 said:

Hi! said:

Wtf is a physical revolution? Anyway, it seems the right is suggesting that he’s calling for some sort of violent confrontation when in fact he was taking a shot at Sanders rhetoric while making the case for a middle ground approach.

What he said was (and I'm paraphrasing)... People criticized me because I support working across the aisle.  Well today, we don't have a choice but to do that.  Unless you're talking about a physical revolution, our system of gov't requires two parties to come together to solve problems.  So that's what I plan to do.

Yes, I get that. The right is playing it up like he is calling for civil war or something, taking what he said out of context. No biggie, just politics, but Biden should articulate better.

Meh.  If you're going to worry about how the right is going to manipulate what you say, you'll never speak.  They are only preaching to the converted anyway.  No reputable news source could say that he was advocating revolution.  Any sentence can be re-constructed as a lie.  

True dat, yo!

Spiritual_Chaos

The sleaze in action:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-wont-demonize-the-rich_n_5d09ac63e4b0f7b74428e4c6

https://twitter.com/DanteAtkins/status/1141168188589260801

Spiritual_Chaos

The sleaze at it again:

The New York Times reached out to 22 Democratic presidential candidates to ask them the same set of questions on video. Twenty-one accepted the invitation.

Joseph R. Biden Jr. declined to participate despite repeated requests since late April.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/2020-candidate-interviews.html

Spiritual_Chaos

Biden will call in sick for the debate. Haha.

mrussel1

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The sleaze in action:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-wont-demonize-the-rich_n_5d09ac63e4b0f7b74428e4c6

https://twitter.com/DanteAtkins/status/1141168188589260801

OMG that is so sleazy... he won't demonize the rich.  Listen, I will not vote for any politician that isn't willing to marginalize some part of the population.  It's literally the most important thing we can do as Americans... marginalize other Americans.  Great job as always finding these gems of truth.