Jump to content

US Politics: I Say a Little Prayer for You!


Fragile Bird

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Yeah but the discussion usually revolves around how Trump could or could not use institutional mechanisms to stay in office, which is an interesting hypothetical.  The hypothetical that he'll hole up in the oval like he's a kid building a fort out of cushions and bedsheets borders on the absurd.  Although I suppose he is a child.

Kind of a funny picture when you state it like that. I can see him crawling around on the floor while still wearing an oversized suit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen, no one knows at this point who is the most electable candidate. To extrapolate from the swing voters in Iowa to the nation at large (or even the rust belt states) is somewhat ridiculous. There were 170k ish people in Iowa in the caucuses, of which maybe 10-20% are swing voters, that wont even fill up a decent sized football stadium. I'd wait for some more data from MI, PA etc.. If there is a brokered or contested convention, by that time we should have very good data for who the best candidate is based on these numbers.

And I've seen polls where most Democrats would vote for the candidate who is not their first choice. I didnt see any that showed it would be a problem for Sanders.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

And I've seen polls where most Democrats would vote for the candidate who is not their first choice. I didnt see any that showed it would be a problem for Sanders. 

Sanders v Trump strikes me as a very different race fought on very different ground than any other Dem candidate vs Trump.  Sanders supporters see that as a good thing, as Trump proved very adept at demonizing a center-left, pro-business/status quo candidate.  Most other Democrats are uncertain whether this is a good thing or not, as it is much harder to really see how that race plays out, and the potential exists for a truly disastrous defeat which solidifies Republican control of the Senate for the rest of Trump's term, as well as state houses in a redistricting year. 

If you assume that Trump will win unless the Democrats change the dynamic, then perhaps Sanders is the best choice.  But if you think Trump is vulnerable, Sanders is probably the worst.  It strikes me as no coincidence that the past few weeks of good news for Trump has coincided with a surge for Sanders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DMC said:

Yeah, things have looked like "this election" for the GOP primary literally the last three cycles.  It looked like it for 2004 and 2008 for the Dems as well.  At this point it just makes me chuckle when people say "this will be the one." 

The GOP primary mitigates this to a large degree by their winner-take-all primaries. The dems don't have that. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the polling that 538 posts after each of the debates (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/democratic-debate-first-february-poll/),

it looks like all the top Dem candidates are quite well liked within the party (approval ratings for Sanders Biden and Warren are all >60%).  In which case, the fact that none of them has a clear majority for the nomination doesn't mean that most democrats won't be enthusiastic about supporting them in the general election.  The polls seem to indicate that the dem electorate generally likes all the top contenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanders has the highest favorability rating among Democratic voters so his ability to win Democratic voters in the general election should not be a concern compared to the other candidates. Even if he is not everyone's first choice he is broadly liked by Democrats.  

Bloomberg's numbers however are quite terrible, and should call into question his electability case. He's at 43/33 favorable/unfavorable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

Sanders has the highest favorability rating among Democratic voters so his ability to win Democratic voters in the general election should not be a concern compared to the other candidates. Even if he is not everyone's first choice he is broadly liked by Democrats.  

Bloomberg's numbers however are quite terrible, and should call into question his electability case. He's at 43/33 favorable/unfavorable. 

Yeah, the idea that the Democrats are going to come around to Bloomberg to stop Sanders has always been wishful thinking.  I'm really surprised Bloomberg is polling as well as he is, and yet it's still almost impossible to come up with a scenario where he wins the nomination.  If Democrats are going to pick a compromise/unity candidate, Bloomberg is probably the worst choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Hillary Clinton had 80% favorability among Democrats in 9/2015, and was 35 points ahead of Sanders.   I know that was a lot earlier in that primary season than we are now, but like, that was also 10 points ahead of beloved Obama VP Biden back then too.     And this is Hillary, for gods sake.  

All this is going to take is another heart condition (and Sanders is not releasing medical records as it happens) or other physical illness of either Sanders or Biden in the upcoming months to turn that good cheer (both of which is less than Clinton’s was among Dems) into RiGgeD BenGhaZi Butter EmAiLs!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The GOP primary mitigates this to a large degree by their winner-take-all primaries. The dems don't have that. 

 

Sure.  My point was that literally in my entire adult life, the only primary with a non-incumbent that didn't have a significant amount of people talking about a brokered convention at this point (in the early going myself included) was the 2016 Dems.  Definitely have adopted "I'll believe it when I see it" perspective, because these type of things always work themselves out.  Or, at the least, I'll begin seriously considering it if after Super Tuesday the field has not been significantly winnowed - which has always been the case regardless of the delegate allocation method.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

Sanders has the highest favorability rating among Democratic voters so his ability to win Democratic voters in the general election should not be a concern compared to the other candidates. Even if he is not everyone's first choice he is broadly liked by Democrats.  

Bloomberg's numbers however are quite terrible, and should call into question his electability case. He's at 43/33 favorable/unfavorable. 

Hey buddy, long time no see. What made you come back after a multi-year leave?

Also, while those numbers aren’t good for Bloomberg, I’d like to see what the trend line is. I’m certainly in the group of people who initially said hell no to him, but he’s grown on me. He really does have a great pitch and the field is pretty weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

If you assume that Trump will win unless the Democrats change the dynamic, then perhaps Sanders is the best choice.  But if you think Trump is vulnerable, Sanders is probably the worst.  It strikes me as no coincidence that the past few weeks of good news for Trump has coincided with a surge for Sanders.

The problem is, none of us knows. If the race is still in doubt when the MI primary comes about (a good likelihood of that); then I can reconsider my Sanders/Warren vote in the light of new data that shows who will win the Obama/Trump voters or whichever block it is we think will decisively swing the election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

The problem is, none of us knows. If the race is still in doubt when the MI primary comes about (a good likelihood of that); then I can reconsider my Sanders/Warren vote in the light of new data that shows who will win the Obama/Trump voters or whichever block it is we think will decisively swing the election.

Yep, but it's just another variable in the electability stew.  What we're seeing now actually reminds me of the 2004 primary when Saddam was captured in early 2004, which gave Bush and the Iraq War a brief popularity bump, and as a result the Democrats chose the pro-war Kerry over the anti-war Dean. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Democrats don't work the hell out of this...:bang: And we all know what Trump's idea of a "fair but quick" trial is.

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-praises-countries-like-china-for-addressing-drug-problem-with-quick-trial-and-powerful-death-penalty/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lollygag said:

If Democrats don't work the hell out of this...:bang: And we all know what Trump's idea of a "fair but quick" trial is.

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-praises-countries-like-china-for-addressing-drug-problem-with-quick-trial-and-powerful-death-penalty/

That "tough on crime" stuff still sells with his base, most of whom are living in fantasy land, or their dementia makes them think its still the 70s.  Its not going to get wide acceptance.   Especially in blue states that are finding decriminalization a better path to success than persecution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seen a couple polls now that have Amy in third in NH. I’m not sure if that does anything for her going forward, but Idk how Biden and especially Warren can survive not coming in third in either vote. Biden can hold out hopes for SC, but I’m not seeing any path for Warren outside of another heart attack for Bernie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Hey buddy, long time no see. What made you come back after a multi-year leave?

Also, while those numbers aren’t good for Bloomberg, I’d like to see what the trend line is. I’m certainly in the group of people who initially said hell no to him, but he’s grown on me. He really does have a great pitch and the field is pretty weak.

The Democratic primary made me curious, I guess. Fun to see so many of the same names around and interesting to see that while this place is still generally skeptical towards Sanders there doesn't seem to be any consensus on an alternative.

If Bloomberg is trending up he'd better do it quickly. Super Tuesday is I believe a month away and he'll have to do very, very well to have a shot. I doubt he will- all I can see him accomplishing is possibly accumulating enough delegates to have a role to play in the event that no candidate secures a majority of pledged delegates. That, at least, doesn't seem wildly farfetched this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is remarkable to me to see how fast Biden's star has fallen. I know he's hoping for a big win in SC and on super tuesday, but that is looking less and less likely. 

Which is stupid, because really nothing has changed save Iowa voting and NH almost voting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, argonak said:

That "tough on crime" stuff still sells with his base, most of whom are living in fantasy land, or their dementia makes them think its still the 70s.  Its not going to get wide acceptance.   Especially in blue states that are finding decriminalization a better path to success than persecution.

Definitely. But it completely undercuts the First Step Act ("fair but quick trial") and any attempts at all to reach out to the moderates, swing voters, and minority voters. When put next to kids in cages, history of disproportionate prosecution of minorities for especially drug crimes, and Trump's idea of a quick and fair trial (impeachment), I'm not sure calling it institutionalized genocide is going too far.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...