Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The 2020 Democratic Primary

17273757778100

Posts

  • -Tal-Tal Registered User regular
    Replace the debates with a series of one-candidate long form QA/town halls with interested citizens and reporters.

    Fuck yeah, I love seeing candidates squirm in front of real people

    2vue7ao.png
    LadaiFencingsaxNobeardShortyRchanenZonugaljkylefultonBrainleechMr FuzzbuttKadokenSorceMegaMekStabbity StyleMaijinamuroAbsoluteZeroTofystedethnever dieMr RayMan in the Mists
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    I love the forum format, but I'm basically the only one who watches them. Seriously: sometimes there are like 200 people watching the streams of these events with major candidates like Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Harris.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    CelestialBadgershrykejkylefulton
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    ...hmm.

    This probably wouldn't work but a town hall solely of people who support another (randomly chosen) candidate could be interesting.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Unpopular opinion time!

    I mostly like the DNC rules for who gets to appear in debates. I think they should be a little stricter - I'd probably have changed the criteria for the 2nd debate to be the criteria we're using for the 3rd debate - but we're so far out from voting that I don't think it matters much.

    Nobody can say that candidates didn't have a fair shot to be heard. Nobody like Williamson is going to be bumping out a Warren or a Beto, and it makes sure that long shots like Castro and Inslee have a chance to be heard - and for their pet concerns to be a part of the conversation - before they get shuttled off stage.

    The biggest complaint seems to be that folks who obsessively follow elections have to suffer through a couple extra clunky debates full of professional egos like Williamson and DeBlasio.

    Which, I mean. Then don't watch.

    The problem is less "I don't want to watch these morons" than it is "these morons are taking up valuable time that could be used to allow candidates with a better-than-snowball's chance in hell to give an answer without the moderators cutting them off mid-sentence."

    DeBlasio's answer to any question is literally irrelevant, he'd lose New York in the general, and that's time that could be used to let the adults in the room speak

    This is only an actual problem if it in anyway affects who actually gets chosen as the nominee, or their chances in the general. And I have not seen a compelling argument that those things are true.

    Like, I'm as annoyed as the next guy when my favorite show runs a bunch of filler episodes before it gets to the finale, but it's not really a huge deal.

    Then there's literally no point to the debates at all. Just skip them.

    What?

    I'm not saying debates have no effect, I'm saying that having a couple extra bad debates has no effect. Debates are a useful part of the winnowing process.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    Julius
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    The only real problem with the town hall thing is that people get in as "regular folks", fail to mention theyre a hedge fund lawyer or something and then its all "Mr Sanders why do you hate my hard working grandfather?"

    EddyNobeardTryCatcherYamiB.BloodsheedAbsoluteZeroTofystedethCentipede DamascusDisruptedCapitalistJuliusMan in the Mists
  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    ...hmm.

    This probably wouldn't work but a town hall solely of people who support another (randomly chosen) candidate could be interesting.

    You'd probably just get bad questions with bad premises like now, tbh.

    PA HotS Group
    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
    FeriluceNobeardYoutubeElldrenMan in the Mists
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    kime wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    ...hmm.

    This probably wouldn't work but a town hall solely of people who support another (randomly chosen) candidate could be interesting.

    You'd probably just get bad questions with bad premises like now, tbh.

    And shitty internet memes that worship stupid assholes.

    Fuck you, Ken Bone, wherever you are.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    Captain InertiashrykeEddyLoisLaneHarry DresdenShortyZonugalPreacherBrainleechYoutubeMegaMekBloodsheedMorganVElldrenMr RayMan in the Mists
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Unpopular opinion time!

    I mostly like the DNC rules for who gets to appear in debates. I think they should be a little stricter - I'd probably have changed the criteria for the 2nd debate to be the criteria we're using for the 3rd debate - but we're so far out from voting that I don't think it matters much.

    Nobody can say that candidates didn't have a fair shot to be heard. Nobody like Williamson is going to be bumping out a Warren or a Beto, and it makes sure that long shots like Castro and Inslee have a chance to be heard - and for their pet concerns to be a part of the conversation - before they get shuttled off stage.

    The biggest complaint seems to be that folks who obsessively follow elections have to suffer through a couple extra clunky debates full of professional egos like Williamson and DeBlasio.

    Which, I mean. Then don't watch.

    The problem is less "I don't want to watch these morons" than it is "these morons are taking up valuable time that could be used to allow candidates with a better-than-snowball's chance in hell to give an answer without the moderators cutting them off mid-sentence."

    DeBlasio's answer to any question is literally irrelevant, he'd lose New York in the general, and that's time that could be used to let the adults in the room speak

    This is only an actual problem if it in anyway affects who actually gets chosen as the nominee, or their chances in the general. And I have not seen a compelling argument that those things are true.

    Like, I'm as annoyed as the next guy when my favorite show runs a bunch of filler episodes before it gets to the finale, but it's not really a huge deal.

    Then there's literally no point to the debates at all. Just skip them.

    What?

    I'm not saying debates have no effect, I'm saying that having a couple extra bad debates has no effect. Debates are a useful part of the winnowing process.

    If debates matter then the amount of time getting chewed up by useless never-gonna-win candidates is a problem. It's dead air basically. And while usually the front-runners have been getting the most time, it's not by some massive margin.

    If the debates matter then the joke candidates are just a waste of time.

    NobeardYoutube
  • MazzyxMazzyx Comedy Gold Registered User regular
    Replace the debates with a series of one-candidate long form QA/town halls with interested citizens and reporters.

    They have been doing this starting in February. I am pretty sure MSNBC has done one with almost everyone of the top candidates at this point.

    Very little breaks through the noise because it isn't "competitive" enough.

    03x29di.png
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    I mean, the biggest problem with the debates is less the people in them and more the people moderating them.

    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
    MazzyxjoshofalltradesenlightenedbumNobeardCommander ZoomAistanRchanenshrykeJaysonFourDee KaeCptKemzikZonugalBrainleechSorceToxMegaMekiTunesIsEvilStabbity StyleYamiB.Kristmas KthulhuBloodsheedAbsoluteZeroTofystedethAimNiryabrynhrtmnElldrenMan in the Mists
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Unpopular opinion time!

    I mostly like the DNC rules for who gets to appear in debates. I think they should be a little stricter - I'd probably have changed the criteria for the 2nd debate to be the criteria we're using for the 3rd debate - but we're so far out from voting that I don't think it matters much.

    Nobody can say that candidates didn't have a fair shot to be heard. Nobody like Williamson is going to be bumping out a Warren or a Beto, and it makes sure that long shots like Castro and Inslee have a chance to be heard - and for their pet concerns to be a part of the conversation - before they get shuttled off stage.

    The biggest complaint seems to be that folks who obsessively follow elections have to suffer through a couple extra clunky debates full of professional egos like Williamson and DeBlasio.

    Which, I mean. Then don't watch.

    The problem is less "I don't want to watch these morons" than it is "these morons are taking up valuable time that could be used to allow candidates with a better-than-snowball's chance in hell to give an answer without the moderators cutting them off mid-sentence."

    DeBlasio's answer to any question is literally irrelevant, he'd lose New York in the general, and that's time that could be used to let the adults in the room speak

    This is only an actual problem if it in anyway affects who actually gets chosen as the nominee, or their chances in the general. And I have not seen a compelling argument that those things are true.

    Like, I'm as annoyed as the next guy when my favorite show runs a bunch of filler episodes before it gets to the finale, but it's not really a huge deal.

    Then there's literally no point to the debates at all. Just skip them.

    What?

    I'm not saying debates have no effect, I'm saying that having a couple extra bad debates has no effect. Debates are a useful part of the winnowing process.

    If debates matter then the amount of time getting chewed up by useless never-gonna-win candidates is a problem. It's dead air basically. And while usually the front-runners have been getting the most time, it's not by some massive margin.

    If the debates matter then the joke candidates are just a waste of time.

    I agree that it's dead air, but I disagree that the dead air has any substantial effect on anything beyond being kinda annoying for everyone involved. And if the worst thing you can say about it is that it's kinda annoying, it's kind of hard for me to get worked up about it.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    SleepShortyJulius
  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    By sheer volume most of the people who would be jettisoned by moving even to a 3% threshold are moderates and I suspect that would help make these debates more constructive, since the voice of moderation would be one of the frontrunners and not, like John Delaney.

    The low-pollers aren’t just huckstering for themselves, they’re taking shots at the candidates who do have a chance—like Gabbard pulling a Gish Gallop on Harris or De Blasio attacking Beto from the left, or Swalwell asking Biden to pass the torch (which sort of interfered with Pete’s more subtle framing of the same argument).

    I worry less that Williamson will somehow start to climb and more that her nonsense about how we need crystals not plans will get through to her 1% of supporters and give them pause in the general

    Likewise the difference between Yang and Inslee is that Inslee is raising an issue and Yang is building a cult of personality—where will his very online crypto-libertarian gang go when he drops out? Into DNC conspiracy theories and urging third party runs?

    This is an impossibly important election and every time the country tunes into crazies and also-rans under the D banner my 2020 hives get a little worse

    ACsTqqK.jpg
    NobeardYoutubeMaijinamuroMild ConfusionElldren
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited August 14
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Monwyn wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Unpopular opinion time!

    I mostly like the DNC rules for who gets to appear in debates. I think they should be a little stricter - I'd probably have changed the criteria for the 2nd debate to be the criteria we're using for the 3rd debate - but we're so far out from voting that I don't think it matters much.

    Nobody can say that candidates didn't have a fair shot to be heard. Nobody like Williamson is going to be bumping out a Warren or a Beto, and it makes sure that long shots like Castro and Inslee have a chance to be heard - and for their pet concerns to be a part of the conversation - before they get shuttled off stage.

    The biggest complaint seems to be that folks who obsessively follow elections have to suffer through a couple extra clunky debates full of professional egos like Williamson and DeBlasio.

    Which, I mean. Then don't watch.

    The problem is less "I don't want to watch these morons" than it is "these morons are taking up valuable time that could be used to allow candidates with a better-than-snowball's chance in hell to give an answer without the moderators cutting them off mid-sentence."

    DeBlasio's answer to any question is literally irrelevant, he'd lose New York in the general, and that's time that could be used to let the adults in the room speak

    This is only an actual problem if it in anyway affects who actually gets chosen as the nominee, or their chances in the general. And I have not seen a compelling argument that those things are true.

    Like, I'm as annoyed as the next guy when my favorite show runs a bunch of filler episodes before it gets to the finale, but it's not really a huge deal.

    Then there's literally no point to the debates at all. Just skip them.

    What?

    I'm not saying debates have no effect, I'm saying that having a couple extra bad debates has no effect. Debates are a useful part of the winnowing process.

    If debates matter then the amount of time getting chewed up by useless never-gonna-win candidates is a problem. It's dead air basically. And while usually the front-runners have been getting the most time, it's not by some massive margin.

    If the debates matter then the joke candidates are just a waste of time.

    I agree that it's dead air, but I disagree that the dead air has any substantial effect on anything beyond being kinda annoying for everyone involved. And if the worst thing you can say about it is that it's kinda annoying, it's kind of hard for me to get worked up about it.

    I think the extent to which they used that dead air in the last debate to, say, have complete nobody Delaney go after the frontrunners is a good example of the whole problem. Which is, obviously and as always, also with the moderation.

    Or, like, they are grifters and including them is just enabling their parasitism.

    shryke on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    I dunno, I feel that if Harris can't handle some bullshit from Gabbard, she's going to get reamed in the general. Effectively dealing with stupid bullshit is like half the job description.

    I'm similarly unconcerned about the threat of the mighty Yang. This is still the point where not everyone is really paying attention, and there are going to be like 327 debates and campaign events after the field gets winnowed down to 7 or 8 people.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    Phasen-TalCelestialBadgerLadaiTheDrifterSleepStyrofoam SammichZonugalEddyboogedybooMagellTynnanTryCatcherMegaMekStabbity StyleYamiB.joshofalltradesAbsoluteZeroShortyNiryanever dieMan in the Mists
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I dunno, I feel that if Harris can't handle some bullshit from Gabbard, she's going to get reamed in the general. Effectively dealing with stupid bullshit is like half the job description.

    I'm similarly unconcerned about the threat of the mighty Yang. This is still the point where not everyone is really paying attention, and there are going to be like 327 debates and campaign events after the field gets winnowed down to 7 or 8 people.

    I mean, we thought that about this upcoming debate. And now it seems like, no, it's not gonna get winnowed down after all.

  • LadaiLadai Registered User regular
    I'm honestly ok waiting until the field gets narrowed to six or seven before I start watching the debates in full.

    I wasn't trying to say I had any kinda problem with the process so far.

    It's just that the back-to-back night, three-hour, 10-candidate format seems, like, tailor-made to remind me of my own mortality.

    4zyrt5.jpg
    Kristmas KthulhuCelestialBadgerAistanwandering
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Yeah that shit is only for crazy motherfuckers and people who enjoy pain.

    Hi!

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    LadaiCelestialBadgerAridholCaptain InertiaCommander ZoomNobeardElJeffewanderingFencingsaxTynnanTryCatcherStabbity StyleKoopahTroopahjoshofalltradesspool32TofystedethAimlonelyahavaMorganVElldrenMan in the Mists
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited August 14
    Disgraceful.

    T0t4kIA.jpg


    I wanted to announce how excited & fortunate I am to be an official #Bernie2020 National Surrogate!

    Thank you tweeps & the entire team who has welcomed me!

    Bernie had me at #MedicareForAll but he’s not a one policy candidate. I support all of his policies. #NotMeUs

    Dr.Victoria Dooley is a national surrogate for Bernie Sanders

    Harry Dresden on
    kimeNo-QuarterYoutubeDoodmannCentipede DamascusElldren
  • BrainleechBrainleech Registered User regular
    3 years of a troll does change people and wake up them up to the fact politics is currently a tire fire of change but they also may be aware to be part of the future and not mired in the past

    Julius
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    -Tal wrote: »
    Replace the debates with a series of one-candidate long form QA/town halls with interested citizens and reporters.

    Fuck yeah, I love seeing candidates squirm in front of real people

    They have those and like 10% of the audience watches. They've had multiple ones this cycle.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    Is there anything of substance to Dooley being a "national surrogate" or is she just another sideshow biting off chicken heads?

    I'm not saying we are going to have an autocratic dystopia, but things keep happening that look like they come from an autocratic dystopia.
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I dunno, I feel that if Harris can't handle some bullshit from Gabbard, she's going to get reamed in the general. Effectively dealing with stupid bullshit is like half the job description.

    I'm similarly unconcerned about the threat of the mighty Yang. This is still the point where not everyone is really paying attention, and there are going to be like 327 debates and campaign events after the field gets winnowed down to 7 or 8 people.

    I mean, we thought that about this upcoming debate. And now it seems like, no, it's not gonna get winnowed down after all.

    It looks like the roster is going to run between 9 and 12 people or so, down from 20.

    That's pretty winnowy.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    LadaiFencingsaxAridholTheDrifterKoopahTroopahnever dieElldren
  • wanderingwandering Registered User regular
    Nobeard wrote: »
    Is there anything of substance to Dooley being a "national surrogate" or is she just another sideshow biting off chicken heads?
    I doubt it. And I don't even know what she's trying to say with the tweet since it starts off by saying she doesn't agree with Trump supporters. But sure let's take a vague, years-old tweet from a random Bernie campaign person and use it to drag Bernie through the mud

    HappylilElfLadaiMagellNobodyJuliusMan in the Mists
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    edited August 14
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I dunno, I feel that if Harris can't handle some bullshit from Gabbard, she's going to get reamed in the general. Effectively dealing with stupid bullshit is like half the job description.

    I'm similarly unconcerned about the threat of the mighty Yang. This is still the point where not everyone is really paying attention, and there are going to be like 327 debates and campaign events after the field gets winnowed down to 7 or 8 people.

    I mean, we thought that about this upcoming debate. And now it seems like, no, it's not gonna get winnowed down after all.

    It looks like the roster is going to run between 9 and 12 people or so, down from 20.

    That's pretty winnowy.

    Also it's literally August, the year before the election is to be held.


    By this time in the 2016 debates, the GOP field (used for similar levels of "WHY ARE ALL OF YOU HERE") was 10 prime time candidates, and the following September debates was eleven candidates.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
    Ladai
  • LadaiLadai Registered User regular
    Yeah as much as 10 to 12 people in a debate still sounds exhausting, I'll take it as progress relative to the 20 or so who were in it before.

    4zyrt5.jpg
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    wandering wrote: »
    Nobeard wrote: »
    Is there anything of substance to Dooley being a "national surrogate" or is she just another sideshow biting off chicken heads?
    I doubt it. And I don't even know what she's trying to say with the tweet since it starts off by saying she doesn't agree with Trump supporters. But sure let's take a vague, years-old tweet from a random Bernie campaign person and use it to drag Bernie through the mud

    The implication is that she agrees with them about throwing Hillary in prison, and it's wasn't the only Trump memes she was making during that election or encouraging the anti-establishment sentiment in this one.

    https://postimg.cc/0bGkWTRY

    1*0-Ezyc4r7BqUnKl-6N6jDQ.png

    Dr. Dooley is a random person, except she's not out of step with the higher profile hirings in this election or the last withs those thoughts. This is from his new Press Secretary.

    D9RyjEJXkAAYl-o.png

    MegaMekYoutube
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    wandering wrote: »
    Nobeard wrote: »
    Is there anything of substance to Dooley being a "national surrogate" or is she just another sideshow biting off chicken heads?
    I doubt it. And I don't even know what she's trying to say with the tweet since it starts off by saying she doesn't agree with Trump supporters. But sure let's take a vague, years-old tweet from a random Bernie campaign person and use it to drag Bernie through the mud


    Bernie hiring assholes who say unacceptable shit is as relevant as Biden saying stuff that makes him look like he'd do a bad job as President. Being able to hire good and capable people is one of the tests that shows whether a candidate would be a good office holder.

    More directly to the argument presented in the video, the racial health gap exists regardless of whether you have insurance or not (or what kind of insurance). Indeed even when healthcare is fully socialized there are racial health gaps. Its an attempt to argue universal programs will address racial disparities when the evidence does not exist.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
    shrykeBigJoeMMegaMekAngelHedgieNo-QuarterStabbity StylejmcdonaldPreacherYoutubeMaijinamuroKristmas KthulhuCelestialBadgerAistanTofystedethCentipede DamascusJusticeforPlutoHarry DresdenMorganVElldren
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I dunno, I feel that if Harris can't handle some bullshit from Gabbard, she's going to get reamed in the general. Effectively dealing with stupid bullshit is like half the job description.

    I'm similarly unconcerned about the threat of the mighty Yang. This is still the point where not everyone is really paying attention, and there are going to be like 327 debates and campaign events after the field gets winnowed down to 7 or 8 people.

    I mean, we thought that about this upcoming debate. And now it seems like, no, it's not gonna get winnowed down after all.

    It looks like the roster is going to run between 9 and 12 people or so, down from 20.

    That's pretty winnowy.

    That's still more than or equal to any Presidential primary in my lifetime maxed out at if I'm not mistaken.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
    shryke
  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. Registered User regular
    I mean if you want to drag up something embarrassing Briahna Joy Gray said in 2016 I'd go with "I voted for Jill Stein" myself. It's also not new information about her, as people dug through her entire post history the second she was announced as part of his team back in March. It's kind of a weird look to go after her in order to justify going after a random "celebrity" surrogate whose primary claim to fame, according to her website, seems to be going on the local news once a week at noon.

    3Unc6CD.jpg
    Shorty
  • CoinageCoinage The Naming of Cats is a difficult matter Registered User regular
    "encouraging anti-establishment sentiment" is a mortal sin? Should a campaign slogan be The Status Quo Rules?

    l5pfwe2qivac.jpg
    JuliusKaputa
  • I needed a gnome to post.I needed a gnome to post. Registered User regular
    I also would be the suspicious of the sources that first brought this to your attention as I'm wary of criticism that just happens to be about digging up old tweets from black women. I generally distrust the internet communities that just happen to only provide those.

    3Unc6CD.jpg
    JuliusMan in the Mists
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    PantsB wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    I dunno, I feel that if Harris can't handle some bullshit from Gabbard, she's going to get reamed in the general. Effectively dealing with stupid bullshit is like half the job description.

    I'm similarly unconcerned about the threat of the mighty Yang. This is still the point where not everyone is really paying attention, and there are going to be like 327 debates and campaign events after the field gets winnowed down to 7 or 8 people.

    I mean, we thought that about this upcoming debate. And now it seems like, no, it's not gonna get winnowed down after all.

    It looks like the roster is going to run between 9 and 12 people or so, down from 20.

    That's pretty winnowy.

    That's still more than or equal to any Presidential primary in my lifetime maxed out at if I'm not mistaken.

    I don't doubt it. It's a historically large field, so it makes sense that it'll take longer to weed out the riffraff.

    10 candidates for the next debate is definitely suboptimal, but it means we get all the candidates on one stage (which is an improvement) or we have two nights, but only 5 or 6 candidates per night (which is an improvement).

    I'm not saying I like having this many candidates. But! If I'm going to choose between letting in too many, and having to deal with Delaney and Williamson et al, or letting in too few and losing the contributions of Inslee and Castro, I'll go with the former.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    Ladai
  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    The September debates will have enough people for two nights

    The October debates have the same qualifications and are actually likely to have more participants because they have more time to qualify

    I can’t find any source on the qualification requirements for the November or December debates

    I hope they move to three or four percent (the donors measurement is too easy to game apparently)

    ACsTqqK.jpg
    FencingsaxKaputa
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Fighting The Rising Odds Registered User, Moderator mod
    If you can't insult your leaders, you are not a democracy.

    I can say Trump is a fucktard (for now) but the Chinese can't compare Xi to a cuddly cartoon bear without getting censored.

    Sooooooooo, time for some irony. We're trying to stamp out people using "retard" as an insult on these boards, and have been largely successful. However, descendants of "retard", which are a large and plentiful family of swearwords shunted forwards and attached to "tard" are still out there, gambolling across the meadows without due care and attention. Fucktard and words like it derive a reasonable proportion of their insult power from the "tard" part of the word, which is kinda gross. So let's not use it.

    So, turns out, you can't call Trump a fucktard. It's us. We're the unelected undemocratic overlords they warned you about. Sorry.

    Please use these handy alternative insults when illustrating your freedom of speech instead:
    • Shit-gobbling oxygen thief
    • Man-shaped pile of turds
    • Canker sore on the inflamed anus of politics
    • Wasteman

    wanderingFencingsaxWACriminalDark Raven XTHAC0Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudSolarMazzyxCaptain InertiaA Dabble Of TheloniusToxDevoutlyApatheticSleepPolaritieMegaMekElJeffeNo-QuarterZonugalMrMonroeBeef AvengerCantideMetzger MeistersouthwickKristmas KthulhuCelestialBadgerNobeardjoshofalltradesKoopahTroopahBloodsheedTynnantynicKayne Red RobeSpeed RacerAridholTofystedethDarkPrimusAimDisruptedCapitalistkimeCentipede DamascusArdolNiryalonelyahavaHappy Little Machinenever dieMechMantisHarry DresdenRchanenEtiowsaForarJuliusMorganVTicaldfjamElldrenMr RayfoursquaremanMan in the Mists
  • BrainleechBrainleech Registered User regular
    I will stick with silly goose as childish it sounds it is a grand insult on several levels

    RMS OceanicMarathonSleepNo-QuarterStabbity StyleKoopahTroopahTynnanAimAthenorMr FuzzbuttHarry DresdenTicaldfjam
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    I feel like "an incompetent businessman" would hurt him more.

    Man in the Mists
  • -Tal-Tal Registered User regular
    which democratic nominee will tell trump his father never loved him

    2vue7ao.png
  • BrainleechBrainleech Registered User regular
    I did not know who was running against Trump for the nomination
    It's Bill Weld
    dfutyzj88my8.png

    And yeah you can do better than dumpster diving

  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Fighting The Rising Odds Registered User, Moderator mod
    I am unsure about the candidacy of Commander Garry from The Thing.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudjkylefultonKruiteElJeffeNo-QuarterZonugalPreacherNobeardKoopahTroopahShortyNiryaLadaiHarry Dresdennever dieRchanenTicaldfjam
  • LanzLanz Registered User regular
    Bogart wrote: »
    I am unsure about the candidacy of Commander Garry from The Thing.

    Bogart are you sure?

    I mean, that's clearly Jimmy Durante.

    waNkm4k.jpg?1
This discussion has been closed.