Wait, ABC ran a commercial from some Republican of someone burning a picture of AOC followed by pictures of death during the debates? Was that just on broadcast? And ABC was cool with having that on their station? And then some Texas Republican threatened to kill Beto on Twitter after the debate?
Things seem dire
The AOC thing was comparing her to the Khmer Rouge. I only know because I saw a headline about it on WashPo. The other thing the tweets have been linked here and the Beto campaign reported the threats to the FBI and Twitter removed the tweet for breaking TOS.
Biden's television, radio, record player comment was absolutely bonkers.
Democratic voters: "We want our own Trump!"
Democratic party: "Well we have this guy who is kinda senile and insane, is that good enough?"
I don't recall ever wanting our own Trump.
The correct proposition is "Democratic voters in the minds of idiotic pundits"
It's funny to me because Warren in so many ways is Trumps opposite.
Thoughtful, knowledgeable, compassionate and courageous.
I guess if you define Trump as "populist firebrand," she's as close as we get. In other Trumpian "qualities," the nearest we got was the brief period when people wanted Oprah to run.
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Biden's television, radio, record player comment was absolutely bonkers.
Democratic voters: "We want our own Trump!"
Democratic party: "Well we have this guy who is kinda senile and insane, is that good enough?"
I don't recall ever wanting our own Trump.
The correct proposition is "Democratic voters in the minds of idiotic pundits"
But you repeat yourself.
I just wish Warren were...10 years younger, at least.
I’m gonna be pissed if I have to vote for another damn Boomer.
Well since Gen Xers are basically in the same mold as their Boomer parents at least she is trying to lower a lifeline instead of lighting the ladder up on fire like her counterparts.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Nate Silver runs polling analysis and now polling.
This was a huge plus for Warren in these polls. Increases in favorability, beating Trump, and voters. Biden was margin of error flat. Castro's attacks hurt Castro.
What this tells me is what we have been seeing, Warren the more she is in front of people the more they like her.
I am not surprised nothing major from Warren. I think that is a strength to brush off an attack and turn it into a stump speech.
I only watched a little bit, but Warren seems the least “over-practiced zinger/line giver” of all, while most everyone else came across as bad actors reading lines of sick burns
Nate Silver runs polling analysis and now polling.
Credence to the “familiarity is correlated with electability” thing- everyone but Biden saw their percentage of people certain Trump would beat them go down
Also credence to the “Joe already maxed out on name/nostalgia and as people pay attention he’ll tank” thing- Biden saw a big decrease in people absolutely certain he would beat Trump...for reasons that are obvious to all but the Cillizards
I’m thinking Bernie is maxed out too and needs something big (like a Biden withdrawal) to shake out of it
I thought the label was because, generally, they were (taught to be) stoics who "sucked it up" and didn't talk about the shit they'd seen or done during the Depression or the War. The culture of the time was "don't show emotion or vulnerability, especially not to the kids." Everything is fine (and the parts that aren't, well, we don't talk about that.)
Again, this is my understanding.
Warren did the best, Castro the worst. I guess that the audience didnt like the attack dog.
Bernie and Biden lost support, electability confidence and became less favorable, Harris lost support but gained some electability confidence and became more favorable. Booker, Beto and Pete all gained. Warren gained in everything.
All told the numbers are good for team not the old white guys, team Warren and team just trying to stay in the race but isn't a twin.
Wait, ABC ran a commercial from some Republican of someone burning a picture of AOC followed by pictures of death during the debates? Was that just on broadcast? And ABC was cool with having that on their station? And then some Texas Republican threatened to kill Beto on Twitter after the debate?
Things seem dire
The AOC thing was comparing her to the Khmer Rouge. I only know because I saw a headline about it on WashPo. The other thing the tweets have been linked here and the Beto campaign reported the threats to the FBI and Twitter removed the tweet for breaking TOS.
They also refused to air an ad that had JFK quiting about separation of church and state, fyi
As I said, Castro was the kamikaze candidate last night. Somebody has to go after Biden hard because he's a serious danger to the party, but whoever does it is going to be loathed by the electorate.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
As I said, Castro was the kamikaze candidate last night. Somebody has to go after Biden hard because he's a serious danger to the party, but whoever does it is going to be loathed by the electorate.
Not this part of the electorate. I ate that shit up.
As I said, Castro was the kamikaze candidate last night. Somebody has to go after Biden hard because he's a serious danger to the party, but whoever does it is going to be loathed by the electorate.
Not this part of the electorate. I ate that shit up.
Yeah but he's attacking someone favorably viewed by a very strong majority of the party.
So even if the comments help to underline the fact that his performance was awful and looked every bit like your neighbor six months before his first Silver Alert, there's a price to be paid for speaking truth to power.
RedTide on
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
As I said, Castro was the kamikaze candidate last night. Somebody has to go after Biden hard because he's a serious danger to the party, but whoever does it is going to be loathed by the electorate.
I'm kinda curious if he's just aiming at 8 years down the line. Similar to Beto actually. Basically say shit that won't fly with the party but move the discussion until the party comes towards you. The Bernie approach if you will.
As I said, Castro was the kamikaze candidate last night. Somebody has to go after Biden hard because he's a serious danger to the party, but whoever does it is going to be loathed by the electorate.
I'm kinda curious if he's just aiming at 8 years down the line. Similar to Beto actually. Basically say shit that won't fly with the party but move the discussion until the party comes towards you. The Bernie approach if you will.
I would have said the same thing about Booker but for some reason I feel like he thought this was his moment.
I mean the fact that the current leaders podium is all 70 are older probably has something to do with that.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Each debate, Biden has taken an initial dip and later recovered. Warren has picked up support after each debate and pretty well held it. Everyone else has pretty much held steady over the last few months, with occasional blips from a candidate or two after a good debate.
Based on the initial poll numbers, this debate was good for Warren and Klobuchar, fairly good for every minnow not named Castro, not so good for Biden and Sanders, bad for Castro.
National polling still has Biden around 30%, and I'm not sure that's ever really going to go down. What needs to happen for other contenders to catch up is to gain support from voters as candidates drop out, get into the upper 20s. Do that, and the primary is basically a toss up. Until then, Biden really just has to be assumed the front runner.
Without any dropouts, it looks like we may be back to 2 nights for the next debate, with fewer people on stage. More time to speak should help Warren and may hurt Biden.
The more of a firebrand a candidate is the more energized the opposition will be to defeat them, and there will be little to no cross partisan support. If this party wants to put forward a risky candidate, I just hope they come out to vote in numbers to back them up.
+1
Options
WACriminalDying Is Easy, Young ManLiving Is HarderRegistered Userregular
Castro did what had to be done, and I think he knew it would almost certainly cost him. It was an honorable move, in my opinion.
The more of a firebrand a candidate is the more energized the opposition will be to defeat them, and there will be little to no cross partisan support. If this party wants to put forward a risky candidate, I just hope they come out to vote in numbers to back them up.
Putting forward the "safe" candidate has led to multiple humiliating defeats in living memory.
The more of a firebrand a candidate is the more energized the opposition will be to defeat them, and there will be little to no cross partisan support. If this party wants to put forward a risky candidate, I just hope they come out to vote in numbers to back them up.
Name a Presidential election that's happened in since World War II and I'll name you three where that the opposite happened.
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
The more of a firebrand a candidate is the more energized the opposition will be to defeat them, and there will be little to no cross partisan support. If this party wants to put forward a risky candidate, I just hope they come out to vote in numbers to back them up.
Putting forward the "safe" candidate has led to multiple humiliating defeats in living memory.
Just since the turn of the century, the safe candidates in Kerry and Gore didn't win, while the "risky" candidate in Obama won easily.
The more of a firebrand a candidate is the more energized the opposition will be to defeat them, and there will be little to no cross partisan support. If this party wants to put forward a risky candidate, I just hope they come out to vote in numbers to back them up.
Putting forward the "safe" candidate has led to multiple humiliating defeats in living memory.
And yet who was the last risky candidate Democrats ever won with?
"Safe" is largely determined by monied interests working through media that exists to manufacture consensus among a voting populace that is too scared or disconnected to act otherwise.
Posts
The AOC thing was comparing her to the Khmer Rouge. I only know because I saw a headline about it on WashPo. The other thing the tweets have been linked here and the Beto campaign reported the threats to the FBI and Twitter removed the tweet for breaking TOS.
Nate Silver runs polling analysis and now polling.
It's funny to me because Warren in so many ways is Trumps opposite.
Thoughtful, knowledgeable, compassionate and courageous.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
I guess if you define Trump as "populist firebrand," she's as close as we get. In other Trumpian "qualities," the nearest we got was the brief period when people wanted Oprah to run.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
But you repeat yourself.
I just wish Warren were...10 years younger, at least.
I’m gonna be pissed if I have to vote for another damn Boomer.
Compared to Biden and Sanders she's practically a teenager.
Well since Gen Xers are basically in the same mold as their Boomer parents at least she is trying to lower a lifeline instead of lighting the ladder up on fire like her counterparts.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
This was a huge plus for Warren in these polls. Increases in favorability, beating Trump, and voters. Biden was margin of error flat. Castro's attacks hurt Castro.
What this tells me is what we have been seeing, Warren the more she is in front of people the more they like her.
Well there's always Joe or Bernie. They're Silent Generation.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I only watched a little bit, but Warren seems the least “over-practiced zinger/line giver” of all, while most everyone else came across as bad actors reading lines of sick burns
YOU TAKE THAT BACK
Your holy land is Orange County, California.
Search your feelings, you know it to be true.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Ouch! I went to high school there!
Credence to the “familiarity is correlated with electability” thing- everyone but Biden saw their percentage of people certain Trump would beat them go down
Also credence to the “Joe already maxed out on name/nostalgia and as people pay attention he’ll tank” thing- Biden saw a big decrease in people absolutely certain he would beat Trump...for reasons that are obvious to all but the Cillizards
I’m thinking Bernie is maxed out too and needs something big (like a Biden withdrawal) to shake out of it
fuck no
I may have been born in San Diego, but then my parents moved to Oregon and I've not been back in almost forty years
"basically the same as Boomers" fucking Christ
Seems like a misnamed generation.
The Silent Majority* generation
*yes I know it’s bullshit
I thought the label was because, generally, they were (taught to be) stoics who "sucked it up" and didn't talk about the shit they'd seen or done during the Depression or the War. The culture of the time was "don't show emotion or vulnerability, especially not to the kids." Everything is fine (and the parts that aren't, well, we don't talk about that.)
Again, this is my understanding.
538 has post debate polling
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/democratic-debate-september-poll/
Warren did the best, Castro the worst. I guess that the audience didnt like the attack dog.
Bernie and Biden lost support, electability confidence and became less favorable, Harris lost support but gained some electability confidence and became more favorable. Booker, Beto and Pete all gained. Warren gained in everything.
All told the numbers are good for team not the old white guys, team Warren and team just trying to stay in the race but isn't a twin.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
They also refused to air an ad that had JFK quiting about separation of church and state, fyi
Not this part of the electorate. I ate that shit up.
Yeah but he's attacking someone favorably viewed by a very strong majority of the party.
So even if the comments help to underline the fact that his performance was awful and looked every bit like your neighbor six months before his first Silver Alert, there's a price to be paid for speaking truth to power.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
I'm kinda curious if he's just aiming at 8 years down the line. Similar to Beto actually. Basically say shit that won't fly with the party but move the discussion until the party comes towards you. The Bernie approach if you will.
I would have said the same thing about Booker but for some reason I feel like he thought this was his moment.
I mean the fact that the current leaders podium is all 70 are older probably has something to do with that.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
They're things that need to be said, and the party is better for needing to acknowledge and address them.
Say what you will about Bernie, the party is in a much better place than they were in 2016, and a lot of it is thanks to him in his Primary run.
Based on the initial poll numbers, this debate was good for Warren and Klobuchar, fairly good for every minnow not named Castro, not so good for Biden and Sanders, bad for Castro.
National polling still has Biden around 30%, and I'm not sure that's ever really going to go down. What needs to happen for other contenders to catch up is to gain support from voters as candidates drop out, get into the upper 20s. Do that, and the primary is basically a toss up. Until then, Biden really just has to be assumed the front runner.
No matter how one may feel about Warren, there's no denying that she's putting in a ton of work.
Personally, I'm glad it's paying off for her.
Putting forward the "safe" candidate has led to multiple humiliating defeats in living memory.
Name a Presidential election that's happened in since World War II and I'll name you three where that the opposite happened.
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Just since the turn of the century, the safe candidates in Kerry and Gore didn't win, while the "risky" candidate in Obama won easily.
And yet who was the last risky candidate Democrats ever won with?