2020 Presidential Election Preview: The Race to the Bottom

Who should the Democrats Nominate in 2020?

  • Diamond Joe Biden

    Votes: 11 11.7%
  • Bolshevik Bernie Sanders

    Votes: 23 24.5%
  • Kommie Kamala Harris

    Votes: 4 4.3%
  • Corey Booger

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • "P________" Elizabeth Warren

    Votes: 15 16.0%
  • Beto DUI O'Rourke

    Votes: 12 12.8%
  • Kryin' Kristen Gillibrand

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Mayor Butt.. Buttijudge? Mayor Pete.

    Votes: 6 6.4%
  • Juliyawn Castro

    Votes: 5 5.3%
  • Other Dem Not Listed

    Votes: 20 21.3%

  • Total voters
    94

King Stannis

The One True King
Administrator
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
13,842
Reaction score
18,441
Points
123
Tulsi Gabbard. April 12th 1981-November 20th 2019.

Pete just murdered her.

"At least I didn't sit down with a murderous dictator."
 

King Stannis

The One True King
Administrator
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
13,842
Reaction score
18,441
Points
123
I was on the road most of the day so I missed the new New Hampshire poll.

Mayor Pete now leading by 10% in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Take aways from the new Anselm poll:

1) Pete has sky-high favorables and the lowest unfavorables I've seen. Like only 15% disapprove.
2) Older voters are now moving toward Pete.
3) Warren's unfavorables have risen about 10% since their last poll a month ago.
4) Gabbard is underwater on favorables.


https://www.anselm.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/NHIOP/Polls/1119 Topline Summary.pdf

Things are unfolding as I have foreseen.

Warren and Biden need to hit Pete hard in the next debate or it might be too late. If he wins in IA and NH, and then NV where he is rising too, that momentum will carry him into Super Tuesday and make it his race to lose.
 

Ohdang

Ohdang
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
1,937
Reaction score
1,617
Points
113
The last 2 elections I voted for Gary Johnson because while I didn't agree with everything he stands for, I felt like he would be the most likely to be a good president. In reality, I threw away my vote because the system is broken and people on average are not interested in doing research on their own and practicing critical thinking. Most people are going to vote for whoever the money is behind as that is who will get the most TV coverage, so while I am disgusted that probably many good candidates will never get the time of day in a U.S presidential election in my lifetime, I learned from Trump getting elected that sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils instead of voting for whoever you think will do the best job.

With that being said, I would probably vote for Pete if he's the one the Democrats decide to go with, and I probably would regardless of who the Republicans chose. However my willingness to vote for some of the other big name Democrats like Bernie, Warren, or Biden greatly depends on if Trump gets impeached, or resigns before he's impeached, as in that scenario I may be inclined to vote for Romney over the major Democrat career politician candidates. None of these people really make me feel good about our future. That would be a tough call for me, and I would need to have more information than I do right now.


However in a perfect world, I'd take a good hard look at Tom Steyer:

-I happen to like his assertion that he would use the full powers of the presidency to declare a national emergency to address the climate as I don't believe its taken nearly seriously enough and I do believe only drastic measures have any hope of making any significant impact.

-I also like his stance on congress needing term limits and how he's been actively involved in getting grass roots organizations running to get better candidates traction in local elections. I personally believe the people in congress are far more harmful to the future of our country than any president could be, but they largely get away with their corruption/incompetence (by being re-elected) and he mentions a 12 year limit. I believe that is reasonable as it affords enough time to accomplish goals without making it a pseudo lifetime appointment as it is now in a lot of cases.

-He also is a proponent of a public option for healthcare, which I think is necessary. As someone who works in the industry and has for over a decade, the system can be inhumane, is incredibly wasteful and inefficient, and often leads to poor decisions by administrators in order to meet economic targets.

-Most importantly, he seems to be one of the only billionaires who is willing to admit that the corporate stranglehold on America needs to be remedied. I don't know enough about him yet to know he actually thinks it should be remedied, but at least he's admitting its a problem and wants to address it.

I did not watch the debate so I don't know how he did, but I plan to catch up on that soon.
 

-Akronite-

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
6,679
Points
113
Pete will have a better chance with them than Bernie or Warren.
Why do you say this? Bernie's base has grown more diverse in comparison to 2016 and both Sanders and Warren have a far stronger message/platform for minorities (not to say they are better at campaigning/disseminating that info). Pete only has experience as a mid-size city mayor and he still has a bad record on race. Not to say you're wrong, but what drew you to this conclusion?

If the last three years are any indication, any moderate Democrat will beat Trump.
What about the last three years says this? 2016 certainly didn't.
 

FiveThous

His name was Sashi Brown
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
6,704
Reaction score
4,411
Points
113
The last 2 elections I voted for Gary Johnson because while I didn't agree with everything he stands for, I felt like he would be the most likely to be a good president. In reality, I threw away my vote because the system is broken and people on average are not interested in doing research on their own and practicing critical thinking. Most people are going to vote for whoever the money is behind as that is who will get the most TV coverage, so while I am disgusted that probably many good candidates will never get the time of day in a U.S presidential election in my lifetime, I learned from Trump getting elected that sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils instead of voting for whoever you think will do the best job.

With that being said, I would probably vote for Pete if he's the one the Democrats decide to go with, and I probably would regardless of who the Republicans chose. However my willingness to vote for some of the other big name Democrats like Bernie, Warren, or Biden greatly depends on if Trump gets impeached, or resigns before he's impeached, as in that scenario I may be inclined to vote for Romney over the major Democrat career politician candidates. None of these people really make me feel good about our future. That would be a tough call for me, and I would need to have more information than I do right now.


However in a perfect world, I'd take a good hard look at Tom Steyer:

-I happen to like his assertion that he would use the full powers of the presidency to declare a national emergency to address the climate as I don't believe its taken nearly seriously enough and I do believe only drastic measures have any hope of making any significant impact.

-I also like his stance on congress needing term limits and how he's been actively involved in getting grass roots organizations running to get better candidates traction in local elections. I personally believe the people in congress are far more harmful to the future of our country than any president could be, but they largely get away with their corruption/incompetence (by being re-elected) and he mentions a 12 year limit. I believe that is reasonable as it affords enough time to accomplish goals without making it a pseudo lifetime appointment as it is now in a lot of cases.

-He also is a proponent of a public option for healthcare, which I think is necessary. As someone who works in the industry and has for over a decade, the system can be inhumane, is incredibly wasteful and inefficient, and often leads to poor decisions by administrators in order to meet economic targets.

-Most importantly, he seems to be one of the only billionaires who is willing to admit that the corporate stranglehold on America needs to be remedied. I don't know enough about him yet to know he actually thinks it should be remedied, but at least he's admitting its a problem and wants to address it.

I did not watch the debate so I don't know how he did, but I plan to catch up on that soon.
If the present system is broken, wouldn't continually voting one of the two parties who put us here be throwing your vote away? The notion of throwing a vote away because you won't check a D or R is just two party propaganda at it's finest. Even if Gary Johnson is a joke (I voted for him in 2012 fwiw), you made an informed decision, that's all that should matter at the end of the day. Don't buy into this wasted vote narrative.
 

-Akronite-

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
8,070
Reaction score
6,679
Points
113
If the present system is broken, wouldn't continually voting one of the two parties who put us here be throwing your vote away? The notion of throwing a vote away because you won't check a D or R is just two party propaganda at it's finest. Even if Gary Johnson is a joke (I voted for him in 2012 fwiw), you made an informed decision, that's all that should matter at the end of the day. Don't buy into this wasted vote narrative.
I think it's fairly debatable. Speaking pragmatically, it's hard to argue that any third party/independent candidate in a national race has little to no chance of winning without a massive gain in electoral infrastructure. As a result, many elections (especially presidential) only have two realistic options. It's your right as an American to vote as you wish, but there is some truth to the notion of throwing your vote away to not decide between the two actual options. Most third party candidates, like Johnson, are strictly viewed as spoilers rather than as contenders.

You can say it's "two-party propaganda" (and FTR I fucking hate that we are at this moment stuck with a two-party system) but the reality is that this country has only truly legitimized two parties. It's not a good system, but it is the way things are right now. I'm not sure how to change it, but I would support allowing third party candidates into the debates and finding ways to end the monopolies in the election process. And what's ultimately sad (but hopeful?) is that if the people made the decision to stop supporting both parties as a mass movement, then the two party system could change pretty fast. Hell, in 2016 non-voters could've united to make any choice they wanted for president and would've won handily.

You're free to commit yourself to protesting the system and voting outside of it. But when we look at the platforms of the major parties, I think it's a clear choice which one is open to change in our election system. While the Democratic Party establishment would clearly prefer to maintain power and keep the two-party structure, here are some proposals coming from various parts of the left that would help open the door for the potential legitimization of a third party:

1) Ending Citizens United and the stranglehold of money in politics.
2) Make Election Day a federal holiday.
3) Automatic voter registration.
4) Ranked choice voting.
5) New voting rights act.

Ultimately, I don't see anything changing unless their is a seismic shift that breaks up one or both major parties. Perhaps a Republican exodus to the libertarians, or maybe a split between the centrists and leftists in the Democratic Party.
 

Sumac13

Heretic
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Messages
653
Reaction score
673
Points
93
I'm so glad Bloomberg joined the race!

Said no one ever.
I'm not sure if he believes he has an honest shot at being Democratic nominee. A long play might be, "I'll bow out of race and throw my support behind you if you agree to give me a top level cabinet post." Given how little support I think he will garner, I am not sure this is all that plausible.
 

Zeus69

2016
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
2,191
Reaction score
1,846
Points
101
Nevada rep endorses Biden

Also, betting odds on RealClearPolitics (which favored Warren by 33% on October 13) are now a dead heat tie. Buttigieg has jumped to third, 4% behind. Just shows how fluid of a situation we have.
 

Blink

Rookie
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
54
Reaction score
54
Points
18
Here we see the future Dem candidate in his natural habitat

Bold strategy. I like it.

Let's see Kim Jong Un refuse to give up his nukes while Biden's deep throating his index finger.
 

Radio

Top