Joe Biden beats Donald Trump, officially making Trump a one-term twice impeached, twice popular-vote losing president

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

 

I figured this was a thread for primary results, but honestly, I feel like being merged would be fine.

 

This thread is for primary results the other thread is about candidates. That's why they are separate. Seems easy enough to understand. Also both have separate conversations going on.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

 

[Massdriver]

It’s too risky to nominate Sanders. We got Trump in the White House. Now isn’t the time to experiment with a Democratic socialist. Research seems to show that moderate candidates do better. This young revolution may not show up to vote and we will have 4 more years of Donald. If you haven’t voted yet, at least give some thought to casting  your vote reluctantly for Biden or Buttigieg. Bloomberg also did well in the research posted earlier here, but I know he’s out for most of you. Warren did worse than Sanders or the centrists, so stick with Sanders it you can’t shift lanes. 
 

 Wait until 2024 and back AOC to conduct the grand experiment. Sanders probably won’t be able to beat Trump. Probably no one will, but at least nominate a candidate with the best shot. 
 

Vote Biden, Buttigieg, or Bloomberg. 

PS: This isn’t a troll post. I really don’t want another 4 years of Trump. I think Sanders will lose. 

 

[Jason]

 

[Ricofoley]

I mean, I have no idea whether hypothetical head to head general election polls are reliable at all, but if you go by what they show, they're really jumbled up, and generally there's no more than a handful of percentage points between any of the candidates. In some polls Bernie does better than most. I think it's kind of a fool's errand to try and divine the concept of electablity.

[johnny]

33 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

It’s too risky to nominate Sanders. We got Trump in the White House. Now isn’t the time to experiment with a Democrat socialist. Research seems to show that moderate candidates do better. This young revolution may not show up to vote and we will have 4 more years of Donald. If you haven’t voted yet, at least give some thought to casting  your vote reluctantly for Biden or Buttigieg. Bloomberg also did well in the research posted earlier here, but I know he’s out for most of you. Warren did worse than Sanders or the centrists, so stick with Sanders it you can’t shift lanes. 
 

 Wait until 2024 and back AOC to conduct the grand experiment. Sanders probably won’t be able to beat Trump. Probably no one will, but at least nominate a candidate with the best shot. 
 

Vote Biden, Buttigieg, or Bloomberg. 

PS: This isn’t a troll post. I really don’t want another 4 years of Trump. I think Sanders will lose. 

 

The future is now. Get on board. 

[Keyser_Soze]

1 hour ago, Massdriver said:

 

Vote Biden, Buttigieg, or Bloomberg. 
 

[Scott]

It’s tough to choose your head over your heart. I love Bernie as a person, and as a complete moral counterpoint to trump, but I don’t think he gets it done in the general. Too many boomers. Too much propaganda. Too much ignorance. Now isn’t the time. Gotta find someone who appeals to the rust belt, the over 55 crowd, and who won’t make blue haired college kids too dejected and disenchanted to turn out to vote. I don’t know who that is. It’s not Bloomberg. I don’t think it’s Biden. It might be Pete. 
 

Is it too late to get The Rock to run? (Sadly, I’m not kidding)

[Remarkableriots]

1 hour ago, Scott said:

It’s tough to choose your head over your heart. I love Bernie as a person, and as a complete moral counterpoint to trump, but I don’t think he gets it done in the general. Too many boomers. Too much propaganda. Too much ignorance. Now isn’t the time. Gotta find someone who appeals to the rust belt, the over 55 crowd, and who won’t make blue haired college kids too dejected and disenchanted to turn out to vote. I don’t know who that is. It’s not Bloomberg. I don’t think it’s Biden. It might be Pete. 
 

Is it too late to get The Rock to run? (Sadly, I’m not kidding)

Rock 'n' Sock connection 2020!

[CitizenVectron]

 

[SaysWho?]

2 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

 

Buttigieg with that broad coalition

[Anathema-]

Sanders and Warren being the only candidates with delegates from California would be wild.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Anyone who thinks it is Pete hasn't spoken to anyone under 45, or virtually any person of color lmao. He's a bullshit artist and it's sad that anyone has fallen for it.

 

If Biden's brain wasn't mush he would be a decent GE candidate. But, alas.

 

Bloomy is literally another billionaire racist republican. He'd be a complete non factor if he lacked the ability the spend literally unlimited amounts of his own money.

 

Warren is fine enough policy wise until you consider the whole "I was a native American until 2019" thing and how a white woman coopting native ancestry for her own professional benefit will actually play. It's not just Trump screaming "Pocahontas" it's the ads that say she lied about this for her whole adult life. If you're concerned about Bernie's Cuba comments, this should be very concerning as well.

 

Bernie is an old 'socialist' who just had a heart attack. He's the most liked Democrat. I think anything else would be me propagandizing.

 

Everyone else is irrelevant.

 

If not now, then it is never. Republicans will always always always be running a fascist, it's pretty explicit now this is their policy preference. It will never "be the time" as there is always a reason for delaying or denying progress.

[CitizenVectron]

 

[Massdriver]

I knew that post would be mocked and would go nowhere with the level of passion for Bernie here, but I tried. Good luck!

 

[Jwheel86]

1 hour ago, Anathema- said:

Sanders and Warren being the only candidates with delegates from California would be wild.

 

[SaysWho?]

It's official:

 

 

 

[Joe]

27 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I knew that post would be mocked and would go nowhere with the level of passion for Bernie here, but I tried. Good luck!

 

 

It really wasn't mocked. You instructed us to vote for the candidates you like. We said no.

[Massdriver]

12 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

It really wasn't mocked. You instructed us to vote for the candidates you like. We said no.

I don’t like Bloomberg or Biden. I apologize. I don’t want to instruct. You guys have well informed opinions. But the evidence of Bernie’s needed improbable youth surge to beat Trump is there. It’s risky and unproven. 

[Joe]

9 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I don’t like Bloomberg or Biden. I apologize. I don’t want to instruct. You guys have well informed opinions. But the evidence of Bernie’s needed improbable youth surge to beat Trump is there. It’s risky and unproven. 

 

I just finished reading that Vox piece btw. It's certainly interesting. But basing your entire vote off one poll is foolhardy to say the least.

[GeneticBlueprint]

I appreciate those stats and polls. But I also take everything with a huge grain of salt until after the convention and a running mate is selected, the party coalesces around its nominee, and puts its propaganda machine into high gear. Whoever it is. There's just too much unknown right now to base your strategy off of this or that pollster or pundit.

 

Also, I get the "now's not the time to take chances" argument. But half of me says now is the time to take a chance. The damage Trump has done is well, done. Might as well throw the dice because another four years won't make that much of a difference. Again, only half of me thinks this. I realize another SC pick is all but guaranteed between 2020-2024, kids are still being locked in cages, and other judicial picks and foreign policy items are concerning; all of which a POTUS has direct control over.

 

That being said, I don't think Bernie is any more of a risk than the other candidates.

[SaysWho?]

21 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I don’t like Bloomberg or Biden. I apologize. I don’t want to instruct. You guys have well informed opinions. But the evidence of Bernie’s needed improbable youth surge to beat Trump is there. It’s risky and unproven. 

 

I'm looking at the polling and he's as competitive as anyone else. He also tends to match or exceed his polls (matched in NH, heavily exceeded in Nevada).

 

You have to understand: for me, I know you don't like Sanders. It's cool; you also have well-informed opinions even if I disagree with them. For some of us, we used similar arguments in 2016, saw the results, realized that many of these supposedly not risky candidates run some really poor campaigns that don't excite anyone, and are willing to try the supposedly risky one because I already doubted the numbers right in front of me once.

 

Honestly, I find Biden and Bloomberg and Buttigieg far riskier. In Buttigieg's case, I'm seeing a higher potential that he'll severely underperform with Hispanic and African-American voters. Whereas we already have evidence that Sanders can overperform by getting voters that are harder to poll.

 

And I could be wrong! I was right in 08 with Obama but wrong in 16 with Hillary. I'm just basing my vote off recent history, and I don't think we'll know who's 100% certain to win because the only one we'll be able to test is whoever wins the primary, anyway.

[Massdriver]

7 minutes ago, Jose said:

 

I just finished reading that Vox piece btw. It's certainly interesting. But basing your entire vote off one poll is foolhardy to say the least.

It's not a poll. It's an academic working paper with a much larger sample size than a single poll and a more robust methodology. https://osf.io/25wm9/

It's also not the only research I have posted here: http://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/medicare-for-all-a-vote-loser-in-2018-u-s-house-elections/

[Joe]

10 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

It's not a poll. It's an academic working paper with a much larger sample size than a single poll and a more robust methodology. https://osf.io/25wm9/

It's also not the only research I have posted here: http://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/medicare-for-all-a-vote-loser-in-2018-u-s-house-elections/

 

In the Vox article, this excerpt is right under that graph you keep posting:

 

"According to our survey, Sanders would have to boost youth turnout far above historical levels to be as electable as a moderate nominee.  Broockman/Kalla 2020"

[Jason]

 

[MarSolo]

Mayo Pete is gay. 
 

That’s automatically going to cost him big time in the south and pretty much any other red state. 

[SaysWho?]

I really don't get why Biden is setting expectations so high in South Carolina. From confidence of a win to surrogates on TV saying he'll win handily, that seems maybe not the best strategy?

[Keyser_Soze]

We "played it safe" with Hillary and lost. Bernie is super popular in fact the most popular. Going with the most popular and exciting candidate seems to be the way to go. His message seems to be getting through to voters. I think he's most popular with young voters but if you worried about boomers they are turning around on him too.

 

Anecdotal: My mom is 65 and seems to like him. I think if anything young people just have to convince their parents. Heck she's a big fan of the Colbert show and even went out to protest whatever shitty thing Trump did a couple of weeks ago (I forget what it was, oh yeah that thing where he didn't get impeached).

[Joe]

6 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

I really don't get why Biden is setting expectations so high in South Carolina. From confidence of a win to surrogates on TV saying he'll win handily, that seems maybe not the best strategy?

 

He's almost certain to win. And I don't see how he can stay in the race if he somehow loses to Bernie or Steyer there.

[SaysWho?]

Just now, Jose said:

 

He's almost certain to win. And I don't see how he can stay in the race if he somehow loses to Bernie or Steyer there.

 

Agreed to the extent that being confident of a win is fine since a loss will end your campaign anyway.

 

But I still think tempering expectations on the size of a win might be risky. There are some A+ polls giving him a 3 - 5 pt lead. Lower quality polls do have some BIG leads for him, though. He's the favorite, but without having an overwhelming lead, maybe temper expectations a little? Like we're sure we're gonna win, but don't have people on TV saying you'll win handily because a 4 - 5 point win won't do that.

 

It's all for naught if it really is a decisive win, but hyping the extent of the win seems risky to me.

[Remarkableriots]

https://www.feedingamerica.org/i-am-hunger

Have any of the candidates talked about ending hunger in America? Free breakfast and lunches in all schools i think would help. Maybe they could also do subsidized food trucks for weekends in the most impoverished areas? I remember when i was a kid seeing a food truck handing out free bagged lunches on the weekend.

[Iculus]

52 minutes ago, Remarkableriots said:

https://www.feedingamerica.org/i-am-hunger

Have any of the candidates talked about ending hunger in America? Free breakfast and lunches in all schools i think would help. Maybe they could also do subsidized food trucks for weekends in the most impoverished areas? I remember when i was a kid seeing a food truck handing out free bagged lunches on the weekend.

Atlanta public schools, and charter schools that use their food service, provide free breakfast and lunch. It had a very dramatic effect on attendance.

[Massdriver]

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

 

I'm looking at the polling and he's as competitive as anyone else. He also tends to match or exceed his polls (matched in NH, heavily exceeded in Nevada).

 

You have to understand: for me, I know you don't like Sanders. It's cool; you also have well-informed opinions even if I disagree with them. For some of us, we used similar arguments in 2016, saw the results, realized that many of these supposedly not risky candidates run some really poor campaigns that don't excite anyone, and are willing to try the supposedly risky one because I already doubted the numbers right in front of me once.

 

Honestly, I find Biden and Bloomberg and Buttigieg far riskier. In Buttigieg's case, I'm seeing a higher potential that he'll severely underperform with Hispanic and African-American voters. Whereas we already have evidence that Sanders can overperform by getting voters that are harder to poll.

 

And I could be wrong! I was right in 08 with Obama but wrong in 16 with Hillary. I'm just basing my vote off recent history, and I don't think we'll know who's 100% certain to win because the only one we'll be able to test is whoever wins the primary, anyway.

The working paper does explore Sanders matching or exceeding the moderate candidates in the polls. There is a big catch to it as the chart I posted noted, and the paper doesn't support a lot of the assertions being made about the moderate candidates being weaker even when they tossed 3 arguments against the moderates to the respondents (such as Butti being gay).  But the paper could be wrong, as these things are highly speculative. 

 

On your 2016 comments, no one knows how Sanders would have performed vs Trump. Viewing your Clinton support as a mistake is understandable, but it's also not supported since for all we know, Sanders would have done worse. In other words, Hillary's loss to Trump doesn't prove that Bernie would have done better.

 

Anyway, I'll likely be passive about Bernie the rest of the way unless he says something that warrants a response. This was kind of my last argument against him since it's probably over.

[Guest]

Just a regular reminder that your individual vote doesn’t matter anyway, so don’t feel bad if you “pick the wrong horse”  

 

During a primary especially, argue for the candidate who beat represents your policy preferences and let the chips fall where they may.

[osxmatt]

2 hours ago, Remarkableriots said:

https://www.feedingamerica.org/i-am-hunger

Have any of the candidates talked about ending hunger in America? Free breakfast and lunches in all schools i think would help. Maybe they could also do subsidized food trucks for weekends in the most impoverished areas? I remember when i was a kid seeing a food truck handing out free bagged lunches on the weekend.

 

Oh yeah because socialized food works so well in Venezuela! Bring back the bread lines why you're at it?

 

Hey everybody, this guys a commie!