The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, Frott Scost said:

Because choosing a s#!tty candidate ends up putting people like DT in the white house. If people dont know things like, oh lets say Warren is waffling on MFA and healthcrae is your number one issue, then whats the point of a primary? Will I vote for Warren if shes the nominee? Yes. But voters deserve to know the differences between her and Biden. Or her and Sanders. And there are a lot of differences between these candidates. 

 

What makes a candidate sh#tty is pretty subjective.

 

Nonetheless, you are obviously more invested in this primary than most others - and that is fine. I just hope the majority of folks are generally happy with most of the field and would focus on the positives of whomever is nominated. From what I've seen most folks are.

 

I care about policy differences but they're decidedly secondary to supporting the crap out of whomever runs against Trump.

[RedDenver]

Remember this when there's calls for "unity".

[knapplc]

2 hours ago, Frott Scost said:

Because choosing a s#!tty candidate ends up putting people like DT in the white house. If people dont know things like, oh lets say Warren is waffling on MFA and healthcrae is your number one issue, then whats the point of a primary? Will I vote for Warren if shes the nominee? Yes. But voters deserve to know the differences between her and Biden. Or her and Sanders. And there are a lot of differences between these candidates. 

 

If you think ANY of the Dem candidates at play right now are in ANY WAY analogous to Donald Trump, I'd invite you to opt not to vote in the upcoming election.

 

 

[Ratt Mhule]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

If you think ANY of the Dem candidates at play right now are in ANY WAY analogous to Donald Trump, I'd invite you to opt not to vote in the upcoming election.

 

 

I never said that in my post anywhere. Ive said multiple times Id vote for whoever the dem is. But this thought of if we call out other peoples records and policy positions its somehow playing into the russians hands is nonsense. We are trying to figure out the best candidate. There is only one candidate that is uncorrupted and people who dont follow as much think Warren is the same when shes nothing more than a carbon copy that will flip flop in a second if it helps her career, as shes done multiple times already in this primary. Why shouldnt voters be aware of the fact she voted for Trumps bloated military budget or that she says shes for MFA but her own plan is a public option or many other differences between her and the other progressive? Is she better than Trump, yes! Is she the candidate that can beat him? Im weery. 

[Ratt Mhule]

2 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

What makes a candidate sh#tty is pretty subjective.

 

Nonetheless, you are obviously more invested in this primary than most others - and that is fine. I just hope the majority of folks are generally happy with most of the field and would focus on the positives of whomever is nominated. From what I've seen most folks are.

 

I care about policy differences but they're decidedly secondary to supporting the crap out of whomever runs against Trump.

Well Id say the fact HRC did not campaign in the rust belt (which were crucial states in 2016 and are crucial states in 2020) and was supportive of the trade agreements her husband signed into law when he was president that lost the rust belt about 4 million jobs made her a s#!tty candidate. 

[TGHusker]

Biden way ahead in this national poll.     34% Biden, Warren 19%  Sanders 16

 

What matters are the polls in those 1st few primary states. 

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/23/politics/cnn-poll-biden-lead-increases/index.html

[sho]

19 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Biden way ahead in this national poll.     34% Biden, Warren 19%  Sanders 16

 

What matters are the polls in those 1st few primary states. 

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/23/politics/cnn-poll-biden-lead-increases/index.html

 

I'll vote for him, if he wins the nomination.   I just really hope he doesn't win the nomination.   At best he's 5th on my list on who I want to win the bid.   Here's hoping the early states move some of my other favorites ahead of him.

[knapplc]

9 minutes ago, sho said:

 

I'll vote for him, if he wins the nomination.   I just really hope he doesn't win the nomination.   At best he's 5th on my list on who I want to win the bid.   Here's hoping the early states move some of my other favorites ahead of him.

 

This is pretty much where I'm at. He doesn't do anything for me. But he's better than the current occupant.

 

Imagine the thankless job the next president is going to have, cleaning up this mess both domestically and internationally.

[TGHusker]

17 minutes ago, sho said:

 

I'll vote for him, if he wins the nomination.   I just really hope he doesn't win the nomination.   At best he's 5th on my list on who I want to win the bid.   Here's hoping the early states move some of my other favorites ahead of him.

We have no other choice.  He is pretty ho-hum and will probably serve one term - hope he makes it through it health wise. 

I do wish a more center left (closer to center) Dem nominee would emerge but Biden is the best I can hope for in this primary field as a more center right person.    But even if it is old Bernie there really isn't much of a choice if we have the long term look.  We cannot have trump do any more damage to our govt and our society.  Bernie most likely would be a one termer also due to age and health.  So if he gets too wild, good chance there is a yin, 4 years later, to his yang (No I'm not predicting Andrew Yang would be Bernie's vp choice). 

 

[TGHusker]

There have been several article suggesting that Hillary might give it another go around or that the Dems are concerned about their ability to defeat Trump wt the candidates they currently have.   

 

I don't know if these are trial balloons launched by friends of Clinton or Russian agents trying to stir up trouble in the Dem camp or honest articles. 

 

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-says-she-run-143305688.html

 

Quote

 

Hillary Clinton has told people privately that she would consider joining the 2020 Democratic primary, but only if she thought she could win.

The private conversations were aired publicly in a new report from The New York Times, which spoke with several people involved with Democratic politics, many of whom are concerned that the current crop of candidates is less than ideal.

Alongside Ms Clinton, who won the 2016 Democratic primary but lost in a stunning defeat to Donald Trump in the general, former New York City Michael Bloomberg is said to be open to a 2020 run if the stars aligned just so.

But, it appears as though Ms Clinton and Mr Bloomberg are unlikely to jump in the race, as both said during those same private conversations that they are not sure there is an opening in a field that includes two strong liberal candidates, as well as former vice president Joe Biden and others.

Taken together, the report illustrates a deep unease within the Democratic donor and establishment class, which backed Ms Clinton strong and early during the 2016 election — leading some to claim the primary was rigged against Bernie Sanders, who is running again this year.

 

 

[Moiraine]

Honestly...

 

Clinton joining the race might be good. I think she would take more votes from Biden than anyone else and hopefully that'd make Warren the front runner. I could be wrong though. Maybe Clinton would take more away form Warren.

 

I don't want her to do it and risk her winning the primary though.

[Ratt Mhule]

14 hours ago, TGHusker said:

There have been several article suggesting that Hillary might give it another go around or that the Dems are concerned about their ability to defeat Trump wt the candidates they currently have.   

 

I don't know if these are trial balloons launched by friends of Clinton or Russian agents trying to stir up trouble in the Dem camp or honest articles. 

 

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-says-she-run-143305688.html

 

 

Lol they are not worried about losing to DT. Their big money donors are worried about being taxed and losing their power and influence over the country. If they cared about beating DT they would name the candidate who has beaten him in every poll since 2016 nationally and in many red states including Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin their nominee today. 

[commando]

15 minutes ago, Frott Scost said:

Lol they are not worried about losing to DT. Their big money donors are worried about being taxed and losing their power and influence over the country. If they cared about beating DT they would name the candidate who has beaten him in every poll since 2016 nationally and in many red states including Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin their nominee today. 

so the dems should do what some republican states are doing and bypassing the primaries?   

[Ratt Mhule]

6 minutes ago, commando said:

so the dems should do what some republican states are doing and bypassing the primaries?   

Absolutely not. They should let the process play out but we are seeing it being rigged again in front of our eyes because the two progressives are near the top. We dont need any more people running yet here we are. Donors are getting worried the progressives may win the nomination, so they are pulling out all the stops even if that includes bringing Clinton back to run. It has NOTHING to do with beating DT. They have people in the race now that can beat him. 

[Danny Bateman]

Errr...

 

Democratic donors not wanting a progressive to win does imply the race is being rigged. It's just part of the deal - if you run as a progressive who wants to eat the rich, they're going to hate you.

 

Let the primary play out.