The Future of the Democratic Party

Politics and other such topical creams.
SWIZZER1966
Corner Soul
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Nov 2010, 6:25pm

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by SWIZZER1966 »

NO, IM BLIND, I USE CAPS, GETTING OLD IS NO FUN, TIME FOR GLASSES,LOL.

SWIZZER1966
Corner Soul
Posts: 9
Joined: 11 Nov 2010, 6:25pm

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by SWIZZER1966 »

FAKE DOSSIER AND CORRUPT CLINTONS,SHOULD BE QUITE INTRESTING IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

BostonBeaneater
User avatar
Autonomous Insect Cyborg Sentinel
Posts: 11944
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:24pm
Location: Between the moon and New York City

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by BostonBeaneater »

SWIZZER1966 wrote:
26 Apr 2019, 7:07pm
FAKE DOSSIER AND CORRUPT CLINTONS,SHOULD BE QUITE INTRESTING IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.
I’m curious about Qanon and Pizzarape, can you inform me? I am not a crisis actor.
Image

JennyB
User avatar
Mossad Van Driver
Posts: 22257
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 1:13pm
Location: Moranjortsville

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by JennyB »

Flex wrote:
26 Apr 2019, 4:15pm
matedog wrote:
26 Apr 2019, 2:04pm
And Flex
Buttigieg is an avowed Dave Matthews Band fan
Dave transcends political divisions :cool:
So my friend Chris and his partner Marcus were at the big celebration for Nelson Mandela in DC over the weekend. Dave Matthews was there, which we thought was strange, but then I remembered that he's originally from South Africa (the perils of having all of this useless info in my head - a curse) and that he got rid of his accent to make himself even blander. ANYWAY...Chris was going up and escalator when the human waste dumper was going down and Chris said Dave gave him a dirty look because he didn't fawn all over him.

The moral of this story is that Dave Matthews is homophobic. :shifty:
Got a Rake? Sure!

IMCT: Inane Middle-Class Twats - Dr. M

" *sigh* it's right when they throw the penis pump out the window." -Hoy

Silent Majority
Singer-Songwriter Nancy
Posts: 18702
Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 8:28pm
Location: South Londoner in the Midlands.

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Silent Majority »

Will it be Biden? I'm feeling the power centres coalesce around him like they did Victory Hillary.
a lifetime serving one machine
Is ten times worse than prison


www.pexlives.libsyn.com/

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35805
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Flex »

Silent Majority wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:10am
Will it be Biden? I'm feeling the power centres coalesce around him like they did Victory Hillary.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35805
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Flex »

Silent Majority wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:10am
Will it be Biden? I'm feeling the power centres coalesce around him like they did Victory Hillary.
More serious answer: for the establishment lane, it's too early to read too much into polling this far out - which at this point really just functions as a measure of existing name recognition. I think the establishment lane could still end up with, like, Kamala Harris or (I guess) Mayor Pete or something being favored if the Dems electorate decides they don't want to support another old, white guy or Biden makes some insane gaffs (which will almost certainly happen) that erode his support too much (which may or may not happen).

The question of "electability" will continue to be infuriating and may tilt it towards Biden (or, more encouragingly, Sanders). I actually agree with the analysis coming out from the 538 buffoons that Dem leadership doesn't necessarily see a white male as key to winning in 2020 but that much of the (older, whiter) Dems base seems to view those as necessary attributes. If that's the case, the path to NOT Biden is to make sure that Sanders doesn't hemorrhage supporters and that Warren can pick up enough other supporters that Sanders wouldn't necessarily get (which polling shows is kind of what's happening) and the two of them perform well enough in the primaries to be able to put together a deal to make sure one of them gets the nom.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 116002
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Silent Majority wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:10am
Will it be Biden? I'm feeling the power centres coalesce around him like they did Victory Hillary.
There was some brief item that I skimmed that claimed news coverage of Biden has been greater than all the other candidates combined.

That said, one structural difference between 2016 and 2020 is the power of super delegates. Biden, more than Clinton, will have to win over the base, which seems considerably more to the centre or even left of it than Biden. Maybe that means nothing in the end, but it does alter strategy somewhat. As well, does having more corporate liberals in the field, at least early on, siphon enough support for him and allow Sanders or Warren to seem stronger. Clinton didn't have that competition for the status quo vote. I dunno. I'm not confident but I think it's important to appreciate those two key differences compared to 2016.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35805
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Flex »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:24am
Silent Majority wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:10am
Will it be Biden? I'm feeling the power centres coalesce around him like they did Victory Hillary.
There was some brief item that I skimmed that claimed news coverage of Biden has been greater than all the other candidates combined.

That said, one structural difference between 2016 and 2020 is the power of super delegates. Biden, more than Clinton, will have to win over the base, which seems considerably more to the centre or even left of it than Biden. Maybe that means nothing in the end, but it does alter strategy somewhat. As well, does having more corporate liberals in the field, at least early on, siphon enough support for him and allow Sanders or Warren to seem stronger. Clinton didn't have that competition for the status quo vote. I dunno. I'm not confident but I think it's important to appreciate those two key differences compared to 2016.
Superdelegates are allowed to back whoever they want after the first round of voting at the convention, so if no one wins the nomination outright they can throw it to Biden (or whoever). With a field of 20+ - even assuming most of them get whittled down - this scenario seems almost inevitable.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 116002
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Flex wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:31am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:24am
Silent Majority wrote:
07 May 2019, 11:10am
Will it be Biden? I'm feeling the power centres coalesce around him like they did Victory Hillary.
There was some brief item that I skimmed that claimed news coverage of Biden has been greater than all the other candidates combined.

That said, one structural difference between 2016 and 2020 is the power of super delegates. Biden, more than Clinton, will have to win over the base, which seems considerably more to the centre or even left of it than Biden. Maybe that means nothing in the end, but it does alter strategy somewhat. As well, does having more corporate liberals in the field, at least early on, siphon enough support for him and allow Sanders or Warren to seem stronger. Clinton didn't have that competition for the status quo vote. I dunno. I'm not confident but I think it's important to appreciate those two key differences compared to 2016.
Superdelegates are allowed to back whoever they want after the first round of voting at the convention, so if no one wins the nomination outright they can throw it to Biden (or whoever). With a field of 20+ - even assuming most of them get whittled down - this scenario seems almost inevitable.
You think it'll be a multi-round convention? When was the last time one of those happened? I'm scratching my head on that—not sure it's happened since primaries became the principle means of winning the nomination.

edit: Last time for Democrats was 1952, and for Republicans it was 1948.
https://ballotpedia.org/Brokered_conventions
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35805
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Flex »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
07 May 2019, 12:05pm
You think it'll be a multi-round convention? When was the last time one of those happened? I'm scratching my head on that—not sure it's happened since primaries became the principle means of winning the nomination.
I guess I think the most likely person to consolidate a true majority ahead of the convention is an establishment candidate anyways, and that the left needs Sanders and Warren to both do well enough that they can ally quickly and circumvent establishment consolidation. I suppose that could happen before any rounds of voting, but if both Sanders and Warren come in with enough juice, I think it's tough for either candidate to cede to the other one before they even get to round one.

I don't know if Bernie has a lot of room to expand his base of support, and my concern is that Warren won't make enough progress to create a majority between the two of them because of idiotic concerns around "electability" from the misogynistic, older Dems base. I think if they are at a majority of regular delegates between the two of them in round two and can negotiate a support agreement, the supers won't overturn that - it would be an insane betrayal of the base of the party - but if there's enough deadlock the supers will absolutely swing it to the most viable establishment candidate.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 116002
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Long profile of Warren from, of all places, Time: http://time.com/longform/elizabeth-warren-2020/

Very sad the thin logic that some apply against Warren, that nominating another policy-driven woman would be repeating the mistake of 2016. It ignores that (a) a lot of people hated Clinton not because she was a woman but because of her policies and her character as an individual; and (b) Clinton significantly out-polled Trump. Deciding that Warren is the same as Clinton in the eyes of the electorate because they use the same restroom speaks poorly of voters.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35805
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Flex »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
09 May 2019, 10:41am
Long profile of Warren from, of all places, Time: http://time.com/longform/elizabeth-warren-2020/

Very sad the thin logic that some apply against Warren, that nominating another policy-driven woman would be repeating the mistake of 2016. It ignores that (a) a lot of people hated Clinton not because she was a woman but because of her policies and her character as an individual; and (b) Clinton significantly out-polled Trump. Deciding that Warren is the same as Clinton in the eyes of the electorate because they use the same restroom speaks poorly of voters.
I'm not even sure "voters" as a whole feel this way. It's broken-brain syndrome among Dems activists who truly internalized an insane reverence for the slaykween and can't countenance the notion that people rejected Clinton based on particular things they didn't like about her. I think a lot of Dems learned the exact wrong lesson from 2016: that the problem wasn't that she was a centrist corporate ghoul who was contemptuous of the working class (those are all still admirable qualities that confer "electability") but that it was she was a woman. So, Biden.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 116002
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Flex wrote:
09 May 2019, 10:57am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
09 May 2019, 10:41am
Long profile of Warren from, of all places, Time: http://time.com/longform/elizabeth-warren-2020/

Very sad the thin logic that some apply against Warren, that nominating another policy-driven woman would be repeating the mistake of 2016. It ignores that (a) a lot of people hated Clinton not because she was a woman but because of her policies and her character as an individual; and (b) Clinton significantly out-polled Trump. Deciding that Warren is the same as Clinton in the eyes of the electorate because they use the same restroom speaks poorly of voters.
I'm not even sure "voters" as a whole feel this way. It's broken-brain syndrome among Dems activists who truly internalized an insane reverence for the slaykween and can't countenance the notion that people rejected Clinton based on particular things they didn't like about her. I think a lot of Dems learned the exact wrong lesson from 2016: that the problem wasn't that she was a centrist corporate ghoul who was contemptuous of the working class (those are all still admirable qualities that confer "electability") but that it was she was a woman. So, Biden.
Right, I don't think the Democrats' base feels that way; it's a problem of those on the inside, and is yet another piece of evidence that they are fundamentally contemptuous of the base for rejecting the perfect representative of their worldview.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35805
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Future of the Democratic Party

Post by Flex »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
09 May 2019, 11:13am
Right, I don't think the Democrats' base feels that way; it's a problem of those on the inside, and is yet another piece of evidence that they are fundamentally contemptuous of the base for rejecting the perfect representative of their worldview.
I'm actually not sure this is the case - or not entirely, at least. The chatter I hear is that there isn't necessarily a feeling among Dems Leadership that a woman is unelectable. They don't particularly like Warren, because she's too far to the Left for their tastes, but there's no move to divert support from Harris or Klobuchar, for example. I actually do think this "a woman isn't electable" canard is being driven by (a portion, at least, of) the Dems activist base.

I've been surprised at the number of active Dems I know who are basically strong partisans who have absolutely asserted that this country can't elect a woman and we need Biden to beat Trump. Which, well:
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Post Reply