Jump to content
TGHusker

The 2020 Presidential Election - Primaries

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

and BTW,

 

Bernie Sanders got more young voters in New Hampshire than everyone else combined

 

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/12/21134454/new-hampshire-primary-results-sanders-young-voters

 

As I stated months ago, I think this alone is something that will push him over the edge.  I think it's something no one is expecting and MSM is not anticipating.

 

 

 

I've always had the impression  young voters really like Sanders.

 

 

Edit: decided to look it up and the following supports my hunch although it's several months before the 2016 primaries. Clinton did get more support from 18-29 year olds, but the margin is far smaller than the margin with any other age group.

 

age2.png

 

 

 

Then here is from 3 months ago - are you sure the media/people in general are surprised by this? The data was there:

 

EXTQ4SGQWRD7TOUFILTVSPMQZI.png

Share this post


Link to post

1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

I think this is reasonable and fairly accurate. I just really wish there was a candidate, anybody, that did not come with a bunch of undesirable baggage. I like Bernie and would want to vote for him but man, a few of his things are just a bit much for me. Biden is probably the most mainstream and moderate choice but he just really strikes me as too old and out of touch. Buttegeig is a young energetic guy that says a lot of the right things but if you wait a couple days he’ll contradict himself. He doesn’t strike me as genuine. Never have liked Warren. No offense ladies but she just seems b!^@hy. Yang (out of it now) was a nice guy but too laid back for a serious run at the Oval Office. And then there’s Trump, probably the worst human being to ever hold the office but it’s hard to deny that the economy hasn’t been strong and, in the long run, I like some of what he’s doing to help equalize trade (short term there have been problems) and unemployment has been outstanding. The most important issue in general elections has always been and probably always will be the economy. I can’t vote for the slime bag but I just might be convinced to not vote at all.

 

My top issue is healthcare. Trump sucks on that issue. I could probably be talked into M4A (or whatever the acronym is) but I sure want to see more detail on the how what who when and how much. I could also be talked into fixing Obamacare by tweaking it and making it stronger.

 

I guess it will just depend on how the Dem nominee transitions into the general election. There’s a few I could vote for if I hear the right things. I just wish, oh how I wish, it was a problem of having 2 or 3 strong candidates rather than once again trying to pick the lesser of multiple evils.

 

I don't think you're alone in your thinking. I think there's a fairly large group of people that want to rid the country of Trump but aren't in love with the alternatives and could sit out out of apathy or even reluctantly vote Trump if things get goofy enough.

 

I recently heard some analysis that pointed out that because of geographical distribution of voters, the GOP is much more likely to win elections by appealing strictly to their base and trying to turn them out than Dems are. Which means Dems, fortunately or unfortunately, are forced to appeal to a broader slice of the country. Their base voters are too concentrated in CA, NY, etc. So they've got to be able to win over voters like you whereas the GOP can probably get by if they tell you to pound sand and the Dems are stupid.

Share this post


Link to post

I thought this was an interesting graph. Take it FWIW because these are estimates from a model, but nonetheless...

 

Pete infringing a bit on the Sanders argument that he is the best candidate to turn out new voters. If you believe the way to win is not by winning back Obama-Trump voters or juicing turnout among the base but getting non-voters to the polls, it's worth watching to see if this trend continues.

 

In fact this model estimates that almost all non-voters, without exception, pulled the lever for moderates in NH. Odd.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

I recently heard some analysis that pointed out that because of geographical distribution of voters, the GOP is much more likely to win elections by appealing strictly to their base and trying to turn them out than Dems are. Which means Dems, fortunately or unfortunately, are forced to appeal to a broader slice of the country. Their base voters are too concentrated in CA, NY, etc. So they've got to be able to win over voters like you whereas the GOP can probably get by if they tell you to pound sand and the Dems are stupid.

 

 

It's just simple math. If you want to win a lot of elections, you need to start reaching rural voters as populations get more concentrated. Rural votes/voters in states with lower populations are weighted more heavily as long as we use the electoral college; due to the senate and due to the # of members of the House not increasing. That's for the presidency. The senate is gonna get even harder to take if the Democrats can't find a way to reach voters in less populated areas, but the GOP has an iron grip, and a lot of it is purely perception and not really reality. It's hard to fight that especially with Fox News.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

perceived socialist

I know you understand this, I've read your posts, so I'm not speaking to you directly - but I just hate this as an insult/negative. Bernie is a socialist in the sense he wants to expand to socialized medicine and socialized education. If you like your socialized roads, and socialized police force and socialized firefighters - you're a bit of a socialist as well. Are people not seeing the cost of education, prescription drugs, healthcare? Would we not better off allowing the govt negotiate a fair price for these services and passing on the savings to the American people, as opposed to stuffing the pockets of greedy corporations? I'd rather the couple hundred I drop for insurance/month go to medicare for all, and I never have to worry about spending dime on healthcare needs for my family. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

It's just simple math. If you want to win a lot of elections, you need to start reaching rural voters as populations get more concentrated. Rural votes/voters in states with lower populations are weighted more heavily as long as we use the electoral college; due to the senate and due to the # of members of the House not increasing. That's for the presidency. The senate is gonna get even harder to take if the Democrats can't find a way to reach voters in less populated areas, but the GOP has an iron grip, and a lot of it is purely perception and not really reality. It's hard to fight that especially with Fox News.

 

I was speaking specifically about the ability to win the Presidency, but I agree with all of this too. Well said.

 

22 minutes ago, FrantzHardySwag said:

I know you understand this, I've read your posts, so I'm not speaking to you directly - but I just hate this as an insult/negative. Bernie is a socialist in the sense he wants to expand to socialized medicine and socialized education. If you like your socialized roads, and socialized police force and socialized firefighters - you're a bit of a socialist as well. Are people not seeing the cost of education, prescription drugs, healthcare? Would we not better off allowing the govt negotiate a fair price for these services and passing on the savings to the American people, as opposed to stuffing the pockets of greedy corporations? I'd rather the couple hundred I drop for insurance/month go to medicare for all, and I never have to worry about spending dime on healthcare needs for my family. 

 

If we're going to run the guy we might as well prepare ourselves with open eyes about the attacks that are awaiting us. I'm a bit cynical in this regard so I take the glass-half-empty outlook. You're clearly taking a more positive approach and emulating how one might try to talk skeptics through this. Kudos. I wish I shared your optimism. I've made it in the past myself; I'm just increasingly pessimistic it will work in these purple areas.

 

Even if you and I believe this, it won't matter if people in those areas don't.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Danny Bateman said:

I thought this was an interesting graph. Take it FWIW because these are estimates from a model, but nonetheless...

 

Pete infringing a bit on the Sanders argument that he is the best candidate to turn out new voters. If you believe the way to win is not by winning back Obama-Trump voters or juicing turnout among the base but getting non-voters to the polls, it's worth watching to see if this trend continues.

 

In fact this model estimates that almost all non-voters, without exception, pulled the lever for moderates in NH. Odd.

 

 

Be careful drawing any real conclusions from this - it isn't actually data or results, just a possible solution to a mathematical model. Without any corroborating evidence, it's just as likely that the oddness is an error in the model as anything real.

Share this post


Link to post

 

12 hours ago, TGHusker said:

Maybe there is some good old common sense wt those guys - since they can see through trump's nonsense.

 

Romney should have won in 2012 esp after that first debate. If he had, I think he would have been a very good president and we wouldn't have the great divide we have now in this country. 

 

I barely remember his platform other than that he was stand offish and boring.  Certainly he wouldn't have tried to reform the system with a battle axe like Trump.

 

12 hours ago, teachercd said:

Do you seem Blooimie helping out or giving major cash if he is not the nominee?  I guess I have a hard time seeing that.

 

IMO his real goal is to become a king maker in the DNC, not the king himself.  To do that he'll have to cooperate with whoever emerges from the circular firing squad. 

Share this post


Link to post

FWIW the first thing out of my mouth when the UKR 'scandal' broke was this is a typical Trump affair because it will force the media to say "Biden" and 'corruption' in the same sentence.   Months later the constant drum beat of stories seems to have bruised Biden and may have wrecked his campaign.  Even his supporters don't say much more beyond "best chance to win the general."

Share this post


Link to post

I am not sure I have ever seen a fall like Bidens...he was so clearly in the lead and now he might as well move to another country.

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, teachercd said:

I am not sure I have ever seen a fall like Bidens...he was so clearly in the lead and now he might as well move to another country.

shows how effective the right wing propaganda is

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, commando said:

shows how effective the right wing propaganda is

Maybe...but would left wingers really buy into right winger stuff?

 

For instance, most everyone on this site is set in their own ways and thoughts (some way more than others), you are not going to change your mind, are you?  Assuming you fall in the left/right wing category. 

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, teachercd said:

Maybe...but would left wingers really buy into right winger stuff?

 

For instance, most everyone on this site is set in their own ways and thoughts (some way more than others), you are not going to change your mind, are you?  Assuming you fall in the left/right wing category. 

NDJ even admitted it above.   all news has been talking about it.   it has had the effect trump wanted.   it was so important to trump that he slandered biden that he got impeached for doing it.   and it was worth it in trumps mind.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, commando said:

NDJ even admitted it above.   all news has been talking about it.   it has had the effect trump wanted.   it was so important to trump that he slandered biden that he got impeached for doing it.   and it was worth it in trumps mind.

 

 

So, now you are taking what NDJ says as fact?  Because most of the times you guys all attack everything he says.

 

Let me ask you this, has anything that the "right" has done changed your mind about any of the "left" candidates?  Or are you still good with who you like?

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, commando said:

shows how effective the right wing propaganda is

 

 

No it doesn’t. There’s almost no chance he fell by that much over what you’re talking about. He has been a s#!ttier candidate than Clinton was. Think about what she had hanging over her head with the investigations, and the 2 decades of hate aimed at her. And yet she still won the nomination.

 

Biden has always made gaffes but he clearly has dementia because he has been acting ridiculous during this entire campaign. I think more and more people noticed it as the campaign went on. Talking to a crowd of small Black children about how the kids used to rub the white hairs on his legs probably had more to do with his fall than the Ukraine stuff. That and berating people who ask him questions at town halls.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...