The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[TGHusker]

5 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

Definitely wouldn't be my first choice, but I'd agree. Obviously the VP selection would be important, but it'd be light years better than where we are now.

What one article gives, another article takes away.  Biden campaign denies the 1 term talk in this article

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/474059-biden-campaign-denies-one-term-report

 

[knapplc]

This is just obscene. We need caps on campaign spending, and we need to curb the time frame WAY down.

 

 

 

 

[Ratt Mhule]

The guy who calls voters fat and tells them to vote for Trump whenever they criticize him. Or this guy

Even if he loses I can live with myself knowing I supported and voted for someone like him. 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Ratt Mhule]

 

When someone tells you who they are, listen. Joe Biden basically just said he doesnt care about the average Joe. No pun intended. 

[Danny Bateman]

Drinking my coffee and doing some reading on the UK elections this morning. I thought Andrew Sullivan penned a thoughtful argument on how they might apply to us next year. He's definitely a skeptic of unabashed leftism. What do you think?

 

Quote

How much can be blamed on Corbyn? A lot, but what kind of politics does Corbyn represent? He was endorsed by AOC, love-bombed by Left Twitter, and favors proposals like borrowing massively to finance a Green New Deal that is as much about socialism as environmentalism. He’s deeply hostile to the Jewish state, wants to abolish NATO, declared he would never use a nuclear weapon, larked around the Soviet bloc for decades, and admired the regime in Venezuela. Hmm. Remind you of anyone?

 

Even on health care, which should have been Corbyn’s strongest issue, his spending plans were so fantastically huge that he lost credibility. Johnson wisely heaped praise on socialized medicine and proposed a big increase in investment but came nowhere near Labour’s proposals. And yet he won. It seems to me that the difference between Johnson and Corbyn is somewhat like that between Buttigieg and Bernie. A push left is essential. But a huge and unaffordable shift left? The British working classes said no. The same, I suspect, will happen here. If the Democrats go with Sanders or Warren’s Medicare for All, the Democrats could be obliterated. If the Democratic candidate cannot persuade people he or she wants to halt mass illegal immigration, ditto.

 

The political sweet spot in the next few years will be a combination of left economics and a celebration of the nation-state. Trump has bollixed it up, of course. He ran on Johnson’s platform but gave almost all his tax cuts to the extremely wealthy, while Johnson will cut taxes on the poor. Trump talks a big game on immigration but has been unable to get any real change in the system out of Congress. Johnson now has a big majority to pass a new immigration bill, with Parliament in his control, which makes the task much easier. Trump is flamingly incompetent and unable to understand his constitutional role. Boris will assemble a competent team, with Michael Gove as his CEO, and Dom Cummings as strategist.

 

If Johnson succeeds, he’ll have unveiled a new formula for the Western right: Make no apologies for your own country and culture; toughen immigration laws; increase public spending on the poor and on those who are “just about managing”; increase taxes on the very rich and redistribute to the poor; focus on manufacturing and new housing; ignore the woke; and fight climate change as the Tories are (or risk losing a generation of support). That’s where the GOP will have to go if they want to recover from becoming an authoritarian cult.

 

Come to think of it, this would be a great formula for the Democrats as well if they really want to win in 2020. And that’s where the other parallel comes in. Labour’s policy-makers and intellectuals had no idea they were going to be electorally slaughtered, because London is the same bubble as New York, D.C., San Francisco, and Austin. I had very intelligent Labour friends of mine telling me this week that Corbyn could well pull off a miracle. And the knee-jerk reaction of Left Twitter to the results does not suggest that bubble is even close to being pricked. But London is not England. And Brooklyn, thank God, is not America. In the immortal words of the anti-Corbyn lefty Nick Cohen: “Never mistake your Twitter feed for your country.”

 

Is this sound advice for the GOP (or Dems) next year?

[Ratt Mhule]

30 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

Drinking my coffee and doing some reading on the UK elections this morning. I thought Andrew Sullivan penned a thoughtful argument on how they might apply to us next year. He's definitely a skeptic of unabashed leftism. What do you think?

 

 

Is this sound advice for the GOP (or Dems) next year?

The UK working class said no to more funding for already free and popular healthcare program so I think here in the US we should keep letting people die and go bankrupt from outrageous healthcare bills. Youre better and smarter than this crap you just posted Danny. 
 

And did he just say Sanders, A JEW, is deeply hostile to the jewish state? Lmao

[Nebfanatic]

1 hour ago, Frott Scost said:

 

And did he just say Sanders, A JEW, is deeply hostile to the jewish state? Lmao

That seems to be the latest narrative. 

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, Frott Scost said:

The UK working class said no to more funding for already free and popular healthcare program so I think here in the US we should keep letting people die and go bankrupt from outrageous healthcare bills. Youre better and smarter than this crap you just posted Danny. 
 

And did he just say Sanders, A JEW, is deeply hostile to the jewish state? Lmao

 

To the contrary, couldn't we stand to be a little more introspective and a little less combative anyone makes any kind of critique of leftism? Do you think this is crap because you honestly think it's crap, or because it's saying things you don't like?

 

Asking questions and considering alternative viewpoints is not some kind of attack on you personally. I for one think it's good to ponder the potential failings of the things we support.

 

And no, he said Corbyn was hostile to the Jewish state, which is completely fair, given his tolerance for anti-Semitic allies.

[Ratt Mhule]

31 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

To the contrary, couldn't we stand to be a little more introspective and a little less combative anyone makes any kind of critique of leftism? Do you think this is crap because you honestly think it's crap, or because it's saying things you don't like?

 

Asking questions and considering alternative viewpoints is not some kind of attack on you personally. I for one think it's good to ponder the potential failings of the things we support.

 

And no, he said Corbyn was hostile to the Jewish state, which is completely fair, given his tolerance for anti-Semitic allies.

I think its crap because his arguments are terrible. Not once does he mention that Corbyn was deeply unpopular going into the election compared to Sanders having the highest in some cases or close to the highest favorability rating in congress here in the US. That seems relevant, do you not agree?
 

He also compares Johnson/Corbyn to Sanders and Buttigieg. The problem is Sanders is Johnson in this scenario. He just cant see it because hes biased. NHS is already FREE. Medicare for all would be to the right of the NHS as it is actual govt run healthcare. Buttigieg and others dont even want anything close to the NHS so saying the working class of UK rejected the left version of healthcare is so silly I dont even think I need to explain it to you. The NHS is literally the furthest left you can go so I dont know exactly what Corbyn was proposing but it must have been pretty radical if people didnt vote for him because of his healthcare stance. 
 

GND is more about socialism than environmentalism. What?

 

After he names all those things about Corbyn including the deeply hostile to the jewish state statement he says hmm, remind you of anyone? That is a dig at Sanders and its clear as day. 

 

 

[Danny Bateman]

2 hours ago, Frott Scost said:

I think its crap because his arguments are terrible. Not once does he mention that Corbyn was deeply unpopular going into the election compared to Sanders having the highest in some cases or close to the highest favorability rating in congress here in the US. That seems relevant, do you not agree?
 

He also compares Johnson/Corbyn to Sanders and Buttigieg. The problem is Sanders is Johnson in this scenario. He just cant see it because hes biased. NHS is already FREE. Medicare for all would be to the right of the NHS as it is actual govt run healthcare. Buttigieg and others dont even want anything close to the NHS so saying the working class of UK rejected the left version of healthcare is so silly I dont even think I need to explain it to you. The NHS is literally the furthest left you can go so I dont know exactly what Corbyn was proposing but it must have been pretty radical if people didnt vote for him because of his healthcare stance. 
 

GND is more about socialism than environmentalism. What?

 

After he names all those things about Corbyn including the deeply hostile to the jewish state statement he says hmm, remind you of anyone? That is a dig at Sanders and its clear as day. 

 

 

 

Well yes, obviously the author is no fan of Bernie. He's a British conservative. But he appears to have stopped supporting the American conservative movement in 2003 due to it's rightward social drift under Bush, so it's not like he's arguing in bad faith as some allegiance to conservatives over here.

 

I agree it's relevant Sanders is WAY more popular than Corbyn.

 

Overall takeaways from their election are a mixed bag.  Read this piece about what Democrats can learn from their election.

 

It agrees that Sanders =/= Corbyn. But it also points out that a very robsutly leftist agenda did not win back white, working-class (traditionally Labour) voters.  Nor did leftist orgs like the Justice Dems or Our Revolution fare particularly well in the 2018 elections outside a couple high-profile wins like AOC.

 

Like I said, it's a mixed bag. Certainly not a one-to-one comparison. But I think there's some good and bad to take away here.

[ActualCornHusker]

If Dems actually want to win in 2020, their best shot to beat Trump is Tulsi.

 

Her economic policies should be plenty appealing to Dem voters, her stance on drugs would pull in plenty of independent and libertarian voters despite her economic policies, and her views on free speech and being a veteran will pull in some Republican/ conservative voters as well who'd rather see Trump get voted out but would never check the box for someone like Bernie or Warren. 

[commando]

i am leaning toward Biden because that is who trump fears the most.  Trump and the russians both are slinging the stuff at Biden and pretty much leaving the rest of the field alone.   why is that if they don't fear Biden?

[Ratt Mhule]

4 minutes ago, commando said:

i am leaning toward Biden because that is who trump fears the most.  Trump and the russians both are slinging the stuff at Biden and pretty much leaving the rest of the field alone.   why is that if they don't fear Biden?

Because hes in first place. When Warren was in first place, did you not notice the Pocohantas crap came back from Trump?

[ActualCornHusker]

7 minutes ago, commando said:

i am leaning toward Biden because that is who trump fears the most.  Trump and the russians both are slinging the stuff at Biden and pretty much leaving the rest of the field alone.   why is that if they don't fear Biden?

 

Legitimate question: why?