Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

It was totally political. It’s probably smart for her to try something right now since she’s trailing. I just don’t think this was a good idea. 

You might have a really solid point.  I guess some of it might depend on what your thoughts on her are to begin with.  I don't think she has any chance at all so I look at this as a "any press is good press" type of thing, if that makes sense.

 

But I can see where it could turn off people too.

Link to comment

8 hours ago, Moiraine said:

Why would I replace it with that? Again, you’ve made your analogy worse than what actually happened. You can just say the same thing he said.

 

”Moiraine thinks a man can’t get the position over Suzy.”

 

What Bernie is accused of saying isn’t nearly as bad as saying men are dumber than women or a man can’t do the job. He was talking about being able to get the job, which if your analogy was good, might mean preventing the building from burning down. In your analogy, Moiraine would love it if Danny got the job. Above all else she wants Suzy out. 

 

See my edited post above. Your example isn’t good if you don’t try to make it a similar situation. 

 

OK, that is a fair analogy.

 

Still think Warren is justified in being upset if what's being reported is what happened.

 

But in the end, all of this conjecture is just to pass the time. It really doesn't matter. I wonder if the debate actually changed any minds. This 538 page seems to indicate a certain subset of voters actually think Warren did the best.

 

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/democratic-debate-january-poll/

Link to comment

I am getting the impression both Bernie & Warren are enjoying the free press this is getting them. Good friends could easily put out a joint statement saying this is a non-issue, or answer a direct question on camera. Super easy to put this aside & get on to the actual issues - you know, the important stuff?

 

Instead, we get this:

 

 

  • Fire 1
Link to comment


Bloomberg viewed as the best bet to beat Trump according to one study but has low chance of being nominated by the Dems.

 

 

 
Quote

 

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is viewed as the Democrat most likely to defeat President Trump if nominated, according to a newly released betting market analysis.

However, the analysis from researchers at Standard Chartered Bank, first reported by CNBC, also found that Bloomberg is viewed as having a 10 percent chance of winning the Democratic nomination.

"Our interpretation of online market pricing is that Bloomberg is viewed as having the highest chance among Democrats of beating Trump if nominated. But his nomination probabilities are currently running just over 10 percent," the study states.

 

The research shows that among the top-polling candidates, Bloomberg and former Vice President Joe Biden are the two candidates viewed as having the highest chances of winning given perceptions about how friendly they would be for asset markets.

"Among investors, Bloomberg and Biden are probably viewed as the most asset-market friendly among the Democratic candidates, so their greater implied electability may be why US assets are not showing more stress," the researchers wrote.

Bloomberg, who is self-funding his campaign, has not appeared in the Democratic debates since launching his campaign in late November, as he has failed to meet the donor threshold set by the Democratic National Committee. Still, he has polled near the middle of the primary field.

 

 

Link to comment

With all this talk of Bernie and Warren, here's an interesting twist I realized the other day:

 

Both of them are senators from states with Republican governors (Phil Scott of VT is running again and likely to win re-election).

 

So, if either of them is the nominee and wins, they will in all likelihood cede their seat to a Republican. Ironically, either of the progressives becoming president makes progressive goals more difficult. 

 

Good news is it sounds like they could resign the Senate early to trigger a quicker special elections (likely in the spring/summer of 2021 depending on the state). 

Link to comment
23 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

 

 

So far assumptions here have been that A) Warren is lying or B) what Bernie said is being mischaracterized.

 

Though I find it unlikely, a scenario exists wherein the exchange happened pretty much as advertised. You said yourself someone thinking that isn't necessarily wrong. What if Bernie just came right out and said as much? In that scenario Warren would be justifiably pissed off because Bernie would have just flat-out lied about it last night and gotten away with it.

 

Edit: According to this that's exactly what happened. 

 

 

The thing that really puts the lie to what Warren is doing is that her campaign leaked it and this happened a year ago. If Bernie really said this, then she should have come out with it months ago. It's just a politically desperate move because she's behind in the polls. Plus Bernie has more credibility than Warren especially since he's had a consistent message for 3 decades that women could win the presidency. And he backed Warren running in 2015, then he ran when she decided not to.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
9 hours ago, RedDenver said:

The thing that really puts the lie to what Warren is doing is that her campaign leaked it and this happened a year ago. If Bernie really said this, then she should have come out with it months ago. It's just a politically desperate move because she's behind in the polls. Plus Bernie has more credibility than Warren especially since he's had a consistent message for 3 decades that women could win the presidency. And he backed Warren running in 2015, then he ran when she decided not to.

 

I'm not so much looking for an explanation why this was a scummy move on Warren's part. I already agree with that.

 

But even if she was intentionally trying to use this as a cudgel against Bernie, I still get why she's upset if he's disputing the facts of the matter in a way that makes her into a liar, particularly if it negates her attempt to get one over on him.

 

The problem for Warren there (and probably why she was so defensive) is she has stuff on her resume that already makes her seem dishonest.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, RedDenver said:

The thing that really puts the lie to what Warren is doing is that her campaign leaked it and this happened a year ago. If Bernie really said this, then she should have come out with it months ago. It's just a politically desperate move because she's behind in the polls. Plus Bernie has more credibility than Warren especially since he's had a consistent message for 3 decades that women could win the presidency. And he backed Warren running in 2015, then he ran when she decided not to.

What is so stupid about this is that she is a liar, we are all liars.  Every single one of us has lied.  

We all agree on that, right?  We have all told a lie in our life and we are all liars.

 

She should have went up to him, shook his hand and said something like "I guess we are about to see if a woman can be President, because I just beat the pants off of you" 

 

 

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...