Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
I think name recognition is a big part of that stat. A lot of people still don't know a lot about Warren.
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
I think name recognition is a big part of that stat. A lot of people still don't know a lot about Warren.
Isn't @Hi! quoting a poll of Democratic primary voters? I would a strong majority would have an opinion of Warren. It's certainly possible, but I would be surprised about that too.
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
I think name recognition is a big part of that stat. A lot of people still don't know a lot about Warren.
Isn't @Hi! quoting a poll of Democratic primary voters? I would a strong majority would have an opinion of Warren. It's certainly possible, but I would be surprised about that too.
Yes he is, although at second glance the poll was a few months old, so those figures could have changed. I would chalk it up to sexism and name recognition as possible factors. Could just be overall impression/likability. IDK. I think a lot of this is just one big popularity contest. I think Bernie and Biden probably do well with blue collar workers, especially male blue collar workers.
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Song playlists at presidential campaign rallies can be about more than music — they can reflect a candidate’s values, political platform, identity and target audience. We examine the role of these playlists in the 2020 campaign.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
So vote for your imaginary perfect candidate. That stance works too.
The comparison of Trump to Biden is ludicrous.
I'm not comparing trump to biden. I said your justifications for voting for a candidate who seems to not have a clue was the same stance the right was torn apart for with their "I don't care how stupid he is, I like him".
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
So vote for your imaginary perfect candidate. That stance works too.
The comparison of Trump to Biden is ludicrous.
I'm not comparing trump to biden. I said your justifications for voting for a candidate who seems to not have a clue was the same stance the right was torn apart for with their "I don't care how stupid he is, I like him".
The point you're anchoring to (he doesn't have a clue) is not one that I would agree with in the least. Biden makes gaffes at 76. He made them at 36, 46, 56. The media is hyper focused on them today because of the narrative that has formed. He says one silly thing per week, yet he's on the stump all day, every day, with a media pool surrounding him. I'd like to see the superstars around here do better than that at almost half his age. I take issue with the very basis of your argument, therefore I think the corollary (see: not comparison) you are drawing to Trump is false. Thus far, the misspeaks are a non event because they are not new to Joe. I continue to support both his policy positions, as they align most closely with my worldview, and his outstanding career of public service. Again, you find the perfect candidate that requires no tradeoffs for you and you should vote early and often for that politician. I don't have the luxury of perfection unfortunately.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
So vote for your imaginary perfect candidate. That stance works too.
The comparison of Trump to Biden is ludicrous.
I'm not comparing trump to biden. I said your justifications for voting for a candidate who seems to not have a clue was the same stance the right was torn apart for with their "I don't care how stupid he is, I like him".
The point you're anchoring to (he doesn't have a clue) is not one that I would agree with in the least. Biden makes gaffes at 76. He made them at 36, 46, 56. The media is hyper focused on them today because of the narrative that has formed. He says one silly thing per week, yet he's on the stump all day, every day, with a media pool surrounding him. I'd like to see the superstars around here do better than that at almost half his age. I take issue with the very basis of your argument, therefore I think the corollary (see: not comparison) you are drawing to Trump is false. Thus far, the misspeaks are a non event because they are not new to Joe. I continue to support both his policy positions, as they align most closely with my worldview, and his outstanding career of public service. Again, you find the perfect candidate that requires no tradeoffs for you and you should vote early and often for that politician. I don't have the luxury of perfection unfortunately.
dude, you are making this way more complex than it is, and seem to be getting a tad defensive. I'm not sure what "the superstars around here" has anything to do with anything. he is running for the presidential nom. none of us "superstars" are. The judgments being laid on him are legitimate. I don't care if it's once a week or once per speech. the fact is, he fucks up simple details on a regular basis. I don't know if it's cognitive decline, but it's certainly possible. you are simply making excuses for that, and that's fine, since he's your guy.
trump supporters made the same argument. "I like his policies so I don't care what he says". simple as that. And people around here (and all over) were aghast at that attitude. yes, trump is worse, but the sentiment is the same.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
So vote for your imaginary perfect candidate. That stance works too.
The comparison of Trump to Biden is ludicrous.
I'm not comparing trump to biden. I said your justifications for voting for a candidate who seems to not have a clue was the same stance the right was torn apart for with their "I don't care how stupid he is, I like him".
The point you're anchoring to (he doesn't have a clue) is not one that I would agree with in the least. Biden makes gaffes at 76. He made them at 36, 46, 56. The media is hyper focused on them today because of the narrative that has formed. He says one silly thing per week, yet he's on the stump all day, every day, with a media pool surrounding him. I'd like to see the superstars around here do better than that at almost half his age. I take issue with the very basis of your argument, therefore I think the corollary (see: not comparison) you are drawing to Trump is false. Thus far, the misspeaks are a non event because they are not new to Joe. I continue to support both his policy positions, as they align most closely with my worldview, and his outstanding career of public service. Again, you find the perfect candidate that requires no tradeoffs for you and you should vote early and often for that politician. I don't have the luxury of perfection unfortunately.
dude, you are making this way more complex than it is, and seem to be getting a tad defensive. I'm not sure what "the superstars around here" has anything to do with anything. he is running for the presidential nom. none of us "superstars" are. The judgments being laid on him are legitimate. I don't care if it's once a week or once per speech. the fact is, he fucks up simple details on a regular basis. I don't know if it's cognitive decline, but it's certainly possible. you are simply making excuses for that, and that's fine, since he's your guy.
trump supporters made the same argument. "I like his policies so I don't care what he says". simple as that. And people around here (and all over) were aghast at that attitude. yes, trump is worse, but the sentiment is the same.
My apologies if I seem a tad defensive, but the presidential race isn't sport for me, it affects the lives of Americans every day, in ways that outweigh the far flung effects of the international crowd. So it bugs the shit out of me when I see what I feel are false narratives and equivalencies that could tear down someone I believe is best suited and most likely to win a general and therefore get us back to state of relative normalcy. I have three kids growing up in this country and I have to live in it.
I've admitted as much on this forum. But it's rooted in pragmatism, not hatred.
i actually agree with you. I made the point when he first announced that his age could be a draw back as some voters might be concerned about potential cognitive decline, and of course I got lambasted for it. you bring up facts and many on the left just start labeling you with shitty adjectives. "blah blah blah my 96 year old uncle is sharp as a tack, so suck it, you ageist prejudiced ass!". I'm paraphrasing, of course.
I just don't give a shit. He has advisors and a would have a cabinet. I care about policy positions and so do the voters I speak to that aren't on Twitter. If someone else brought his policies and experience to the table, I'd likely support that individual. Hasn't happened. So until then, the long time gaffe machine will continue to misspeak. Who cares
this is verbatim the justifications many people had for voting Trump.
So vote for your imaginary perfect candidate. That stance works too.
The comparison of Trump to Biden is ludicrous.
I'm not comparing trump to biden. I said your justifications for voting for a candidate who seems to not have a clue was the same stance the right was torn apart for with their "I don't care how stupid he is, I like him".
The point you're anchoring to (he doesn't have a clue) is not one that I would agree with in the least. Biden makes gaffes at 76. He made them at 36, 46, 56. The media is hyper focused on them today because of the narrative that has formed. He says one silly thing per week, yet he's on the stump all day, every day, with a media pool surrounding him. I'd like to see the superstars around here do better than that at almost half his age. I take issue with the very basis of your argument, therefore I think the corollary (see: not comparison) you are drawing to Trump is false. Thus far, the misspeaks are a non event because they are not new to Joe. I continue to support both his policy positions, as they align most closely with my worldview, and his outstanding career of public service. Again, you find the perfect candidate that requires no tradeoffs for you and you should vote early and often for that politician. I don't have the luxury of perfection unfortunately.
dude, you are making this way more complex than it is, and seem to be getting a tad defensive. I'm not sure what "the superstars around here" has anything to do with anything. he is running for the presidential nom. none of us "superstars" are. The judgments being laid on him are legitimate. I don't care if it's once a week or once per speech. the fact is, he fucks up simple details on a regular basis. I don't know if it's cognitive decline, but it's certainly possible. you are simply making excuses for that, and that's fine, since he's your guy.
trump supporters made the same argument. "I like his policies so I don't care what he says". simple as that. And people around here (and all over) were aghast at that attitude. yes, trump is worse, but the sentiment is the same.
My apologies if I seem a tad defensive, but the presidential race isn't sport for me, it affects the lives of Americans every day, in ways that outweigh the far flung effects of the international crowd. So it bugs the shit out of me when I see what I feel are false narratives and equivalencies that could tear down someone I believe is best suited and most likely to win a general and therefore get us back to state of relative normalcy. I have three kids growing up in this country and I have to live in it.
I hear ya. but don't underestimate the effects, short and long term, that this has on the international crowd, which is part of the reason many of us are so invested in all of this. we are seeing ripples of the trump effect in our politics, and it scares me. so far, most of them have been snuffed out, but some are still smoldering waiting to be re-ignited.
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
It doesn't unless that's the African american vote that tends to heavily prefer the perceived frontrunner. They support Bernie because they got to know him in 16 and aren't willing to go to someone untested like warren.
I really wanted to see a woman do well but with Harris' foolish busing attack and Warren looking foolish with her DNA test, I'm stumped why these two are the dems favorite female candidates. I really don't get this party.
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
It doesn't unless that's the African american vote that tends to heavily prefer the perceived frontrunner. They support Bernie because they got to know him in 16 and aren't willing to go to someone untested like warren.
I really wanted to see a woman do well but with Harris' foolish busing attack and Warren looking foolish with her DNA test, I'm stumped why these two are the dems favorite female candidates. I really don't get this party.
I’m not sure they’re the “dems” female candidates as much as they are the voters’ female candidates. Warren is working her ass off in Iowa. Harris has dropped of late and may not be anyone’s favorite much longer. And the Pocahontas shit won’t matter. Old news with little lasting substance come November 2020. Fun times.
Bernie supporters favor Biden over Warren 26% to 16% for their second choice. I don’t know if it would be a smart play to drop out now and pick Bernie as vp. I think she gets a huge bump just from the media coverage that it would cause, but could be short lived. What if it forces Biden to pick a vp then? Bernie and Warren don’t go after each other because their in the same lane. ”The fact of the matter is”, as Joe likes to say, Biden needs to not be so frantic on the debate stage. Calm, coherent sentences.Probably hard when you’re constantly under attack.
That's a really interesting stat. The only explanation I can think of is sexism. Policy wise, makes no sense.
It doesn't unless that's the African american vote that tends to heavily prefer the perceived frontrunner. They support Bernie because they got to know him in 16 and aren't willing to go to someone untested like warren.
I really wanted to see a woman do well but with Harris' foolish busing attack and Warren looking foolish with her DNA test, I'm stumped why these two are the dems favorite female candidates. I really don't get this party.
Also possible, but I thought his share of the African American vote was very low to start. I would very happily vote for a woman. I think it's high time, and I still think Hillary would have been an excellent president. I admire her razor sharp focus.
Good poll. Warren still has the Sanders problem. She's also been quietly reaching out to DNC power brokers to let them know that she is not looking for a political 'revolution'. She wants to reform the current capitalistic system. If she's being straightforward, then I'm more sympathetic to her positions, but she needs to get centered soon enough. If I were her, I'd start going after Biden supporters. That's the path to victory because I just don't see Sanders dropping out until deep, deep into the primary season, if ever. Going after Biden supporters means moderating some of her positions on taxation.
I like the way that sounds about Warren, but shouldn't she be telling us that? Kinda creepy she is sharing her populist side privately with power brokers
Are both of you referring to this article? What Elizabeth Warren Is Quietly Telling Democratic Insiders https://nyti.ms/2KXeqQ0
She's actually a partisan Dem as opposed to ol' Berns.
A Democrat, trying to win the Democratic primary by appealing to Democrats is....worthy of a news story, I guess.
I think she is being strategic and is thinking ahead. This is not some corrupting or compromising of Warren or her policies. People seem to lose sight of the fact that she is running for president, and once she has won, if she is going to pass major legislation, she will need just about everyone on the Democratic side to get it done, including establishment figures and moderate Dems.
If she passes even 20% of everything she's promising I'll deem it a huge success.
But I'm deciding whether she'd be a strong general election candidate.
As I see it, despite the good points you raised, she has 2 massive strikes against her:
1. The GOP will use her strong socialist policy beliefs against her. Something the dems have not overcome when the attacks were legit (they weren't with obama).
2. Her response to Trump mocking her DNA test was historically weak. Weak on a Dukakis level. Unfortunately for the dems, attacks like this will be often during the general.
Re: #1: I personally think everyone is too worried about this. I believe whom ever the nominee will be will get labeled a socialist and ran into the ground regardless. If every Dem campaign doesn't know this by now, then they should just give up.
Re: #2: I think this is all trivial nonsense, sorry not trying to demean your opinion here I'm really not. Clinton ran legitimate slander ads with this Fuckface making fun of the handicapped along with audio of being misogynistic. The people that buy into his shit are already with him. Consistent polls show him losing to pretty much any of the top 3 or 4 candidates. That's not to say that whom ever it is should just coast. They better pound the fucking pavement hard. Additionally, I think whatever the amount of Obama voters in '12 that voted for Fuckface in '16 came back in the midterms, or mostly came back.
Every cycle the outcome of the Presidential General is always super close. Dems should be worried about nothing right now other than getting their candidate that receives the most votes, that's what a primary is for. Fuck everything else. People can say what they will about Howard Dean (his policies were actually really good, but all he's remembered for is the dipshit thing), but saw a quote in a Politico article from him that essentially said, "do you want real change, or who is 'electable' enough to beat Trump (whatever the fuck that means)"? My concern isn't with electability, I'll worry about that when we get to that point. Biden's wife's platform of talking down to people, that they should vote for her husband for no other reason than the fear that Trump gets re-elected? Please, get out with that nonsense. Gimme substance. To me everyone should vote for the candidate that offers them the greatest substance. And for me it's Elizabeth and not Joe.
Basically, if the Dems do their job correctly - as it was done in the previous two terms before '16 (talking about real campaigning here) - then we shouldn't see a repeat. But whatever, again, I'll hope for the best and expect the worst and just keep knocking on doors in my neighborhood. Oh, and I hope that people have started giving a shit about who serves them, beyond voting for one person every four years. There's an election every year. VOTE.
That's the Warren argument, that the Republicans will call dems socialist no matter what.
That claim comes directly from the Lazy Hillary School of Campaigning and its unknowingly attacking voters ability to decide whether that attack has merit. Trump will certainly be ready to pounce if that's her general election strategy to defend forcing socialist healthcare on us all.
"Geez if they're gonna call me a socialist no matter what I might as well try to convince moderates in purple states to vote to convert nearly 20% of the economy into a socialist system." Damn that's a lazy rebuttal to an accurate trump attack, ala Hillary and ala the Pocahontas dna rebuttal. ...
The bottom line is that to force everyone out of their Blue Cross Blue shield will create a general election firestorm that will make Lock Her Up look like a pebble.
Lock Her Up didn't become a firestorm because people care about email servers. It did because Hilary was clueless how to defend her decisions and explain herself to the american people honestly.
Trump went after warren almost a year ago on the DNA test and she's countered by apologizing for her decision.
He boxed her into a corner just like he did to Hillary.
Winning elections is NOT about the best policy. It is about being able to convince undecideds in swing states that your policy will work in this capitslism loving country and to effectively counter opposition attack.
God help us all if Warren gets the nom.
Where have you heard Warren make an argument in favour of socialism? I haven't, and I've followed her fairly closely. She's been very transparent about being a capitalist and believing in capitalism so it seems to me you're just making up what you want Elizabeth Warren to be saying to diminish her potential.
As for helping us - god hasn't done shit to date, so why would he or she start now? It'd be nice if we stopped waiting for invisible entities to fix our mistakes and instead took some personal accountability for once in our pathetic and destructive existence.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
Trump and the GOP will label and hammer Biden as an old man losing his mind.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
Trump and the GOP will label and hammer Biden as an old man losing his mind.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
There's a big difference between accusing someone of being old, and accusing them of having a plan to raise tax rates to 40% and eliminate private insurance. No one's going back to Trump if they think he's a douche just because Joe Biden has some gaffs. People will go back to Trump if they think their taxes are doubling and they have to wait in line for doctors.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
Trump and the GOP will label and hammer Biden as an old man losing his mind.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
There's a big difference between accusing someone of being old, and accusing them of having a plan to raise tax rates to 40% and eliminate private insurance. No one's going back to Trump if they think he's a douche just because Joe Biden has some gaffs. People will go back to Trump if they think their taxes are doubling and they have to wait in line for doctors.
You really don't think the attacks on Hillary's health in 2016 were effective?
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
Trump and the GOP will label and hammer Biden as an old man losing his mind.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
There's a big difference between accusing someone of being old, and accusing them of having a plan to raise tax rates to 40% and eliminate private insurance. No one's going back to Trump if they think he's a douche just because Joe Biden has some gaffs. People will go back to Trump if they think their taxes are doubling and they have to wait in line for doctors.
You really don't think the attacks on Hillary's health in 2016 were effective?
No, not really. The attacks that worked were related to the Comey stuff. I also think the Bernie thing depressed turnout because the party never really coalesced. But either way, Trump was an unknown entity in 2016. Now he has a record he has to defend, so I don't think the calculus is even close to being the same.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
Trump and the GOP will label and hammer Biden as an old man losing his mind.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
There's a big difference between accusing someone of being old, and accusing them of having a plan to raise tax rates to 40% and eliminate private insurance. No one's going back to Trump if they think he's a douche just because Joe Biden has some gaffs. People will go back to Trump if they think their taxes are doubling and they have to wait in line for doctors.
You really don't think the attacks on Hillary's health in 2016 were effective?
No, not really. The attacks that worked were related to the Comey stuff. I also think the Bernie thing depressed turnout because the party never really coalesced. But either way, Trump was an unknown entity in 2016. Now he has a record he has to defend, so I don't think the calculus is even close to being the same.
Okay, here's Trump's record then. I tried to take away your health care, and still want to.
That's an easy counter attack any democratic candidate (including Warren) can make, and I think convincingly.
I don't think Lex meant the God statement literally.
Regarding your other point, she has said she's a capitalist, however her policies never focus on that. If she latches on to M4A, which effectively eliminates private insurance, it will be difficult to shake that accusation regardless if what she claims she is.
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
Trump and the GOP will label and hammer Biden as an old man losing his mind.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
There's a big difference between accusing someone of being old, and accusing them of having a plan to raise tax rates to 40% and eliminate private insurance. No one's going back to Trump if they think he's a douche just because Joe Biden has some gaffs. People will go back to Trump if they think their taxes are doubling and they have to wait in line for doctors.
You really don't think the attacks on Hillary's health in 2016 were effective?
No, not really. The attacks that worked were related to the Comey stuff. I also think the Bernie thing depressed turnout because the party never really coalesced. But either way, Trump was an unknown entity in 2016. Now he has a record he has to defend, so I don't think the calculus is even close to being the same.
Okay, here's Trump's record then. I tried to take away your health care, and still want to.
That's an easy counter attack any democratic candidate (including Warren) can make, and I think convincingly.
Yes, he tried to kill Obamacare, but 1. it hasn't happened and 2. Obamacare is generally not used by what you would consider swing voters, those in the suburbs of PA, OH, MI, etc. Most Americans are on private insurance and receive it through work, not the exchange. Obamacare covered the gap between medicaid users and those with employee based insurance. That was important to be sure, but when faced with a vote of continuing to strip away Obamacare or going M4A, I think Trump would be happy with that election choice. He's very vulnerable on healthcare and making the election a referendum on M4A would be exactly the issue he needs to go on the offensive.
M4A may come to the US one day, but I don't believe it's political wise to make 2020 about that issue. The election must be about Trump and his fitness for office.
I think a Warren candidacy will drive more Trump voters and his base to the polls compared to Biden. I worry about a Warren presidency could be divisive for the country and feel Biden would be a best bet at a return to normalcy and our best shot at maybe passing through some more progressive legislation.
Anybody think the Senator from California will be making amends with Biden during the next debate and perhaps make a play for VP?
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Comments
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022
Song playlists at presidential campaign rallies can be about more than music — they can reflect a candidate’s values, political platform, identity and target audience. We examine the role of these playlists in the 2020 campaign.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/podcasts/the-daily/2020-campaign-songs.html
Cheers,
HFD
Cheers,
HFD
He'd totally fucking fall for it.
trump supporters made the same argument. "I like his policies so I don't care what he says". simple as that. And people around here (and all over) were aghast at that attitude. yes, trump is worse, but the sentiment is the same.
Cheers,
HFD
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Cheers,
HFD
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/04/politics/marianne-williamson-hurricane-dorian-tweet-trnd/index.html
Cheers,
HFD
Cheers,
HFD
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/04/joe-biden-gaffe-2020-228000
Thanks mr. I think you nailed it.
The god help us all was a shout of love and desperation to the beloved Hank Moody ("god hates us all")
If Warren insists on forcing us to give up insurance she will be tagged as a socialist no matter what she claims to be.
It's getting very scary how many are forgetting how effective the trump GOP was at setting the narrative and making attacks stick.
Let's not help him with 100% socialist policies.
It doesn't unless that's the African american vote that tends to heavily prefer the perceived frontrunner. They support Bernie because they got to know him in 16 and aren't willing to go to someone untested like warren.
I really wanted to see a woman do well but with Harris' foolish busing attack and Warren looking foolish with her DNA test, I'm stumped why these two are the dems favorite female candidates. I really don't get this party.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I would very happily vote for a woman. I think it's high time, and I still think Hillary would have been an excellent president. I admire her razor sharp focus.
You really shouldn't concern yourself too much with what the GOP is gonna do. The GOP is gonna do what it does whether you like it or not.
That's an easy counter attack any democratic candidate (including Warren) can make, and I think convincingly.
M4A may come to the US one day, but I don't believe it's political wise to make 2020 about that issue. The election must be about Trump and his fitness for office.
could be divisive for the country and feel Biden would be a best bet at a return to normalcy and our best shot at maybe passing through some more progressive legislation.
Anybody think the Senator from California will be making amends with Biden during the next debate and perhaps make a play for VP?
Detroit 2000, Detroit 2003 1-2, Grand Rapids VFC 2004, Philly 2005, Grand Rapids 2006, Detroit 2006, Cleveland 2006, Lollapalooza 2007, Detroit Eddie Solo 2011, Detroit 2014, Chicago 2016 1-2, Chicago 2018 1-2, Ohana Encore 2021 1-2, Chicago Eddie/Earthlings 2022 1-2, Nashville 2022, St. Louis 2022