As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Dem Primary: There Are Too Many Candidates Nowadays, Please Eliminate Twenty

16364666869100

Posts

  • Crimson KingCrimson King Registered User regular
    i would like to watch a long video of warren speaking at some point, so i can get a sense of how i think she'll do at communicating with the electorate

    i tried to watch the debates but they're privatised, hilariously

  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    Kamar wrote: »
    I do think the best route forward for the left and center-left isn't trying to peel off current white labor voters in the hopes that they pay attention to the economic bits and don't get turned off by the social bits (because like it or not, a fuckton of white voters and potential voters are single-issue voters for white supremacy), it's activating the much higher proportion of minorities and young people who don't vote.

    http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics

    I suspect stamping out voter suppression and making it easier to vote would do more for the left than any stated policy or messaging or campaign style. I favor mandatory voting as a solution, personally, but even just making it so anyone who cares can vote without headache would do a lot.

    Unfortunately, stamping out voter suppression and making it easier to vote is a relatively hard issue to win elections on, for obvious reasons.

    I agree with this for the most part, but I think its too dangerous to institute mandatory voting (without even getting into the ethical debates about it in a vacuum) for as long as the GOP exists because they will surely use it to attack PoC

    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited September 2019
    i would like to watch a long video of warren speaking at some point, so i can get a sense of how i think she'll do at communicating with the electorate

    i tried to watch the debates but they're privatised, hilariously

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go_ELOsVPWg

    it's only 10 minutes of it, but here's her from the Climate Change town hall

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • KamarKamar Registered User regular
    edited September 2019
    Lanz wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    I do think the best route forward for the left and center-left isn't trying to peel off current white labor voters in the hopes that they pay attention to the economic bits and don't get turned off by the social bits (because like it or not, a fuckton of white voters and potential voters are single-issue voters for white supremacy), it's activating the much higher proportion of minorities and young people who don't vote.

    http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics

    I suspect stamping out voter suppression and making it easier to vote would do more for the left than any stated policy or messaging or campaign style. I favor mandatory voting as a solution, personally, but even just making it so anyone who cares can vote without headache would do a lot.

    Unfortunately, stamping out voter suppression and making it easier to vote is a relatively hard issue to win elections on, for obvious reasons.

    I agree with this for the most part, but I think its too dangerous to institute mandatory voting (without even getting into the ethical debates about it in a vacuum) for as long as the GOP exists because they will surely use it to attack PoC

    My thinking is that you'll have the GOP undermining the ability of POC to vote no matter what, and that it would take them more effort and leave more evidence with mandatory voting.

    edit: But this is getting a bit far afield, my bad.

    Kamar on
  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited September 2019
    Kamar wrote: »
    Lanz wrote: »
    Kamar wrote: »
    I do think the best route forward for the left and center-left isn't trying to peel off current white labor voters in the hopes that they pay attention to the economic bits and don't get turned off by the social bits (because like it or not, a fuckton of white voters and potential voters are single-issue voters for white supremacy), it's activating the much higher proportion of minorities and young people who don't vote.

    http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics

    I suspect stamping out voter suppression and making it easier to vote would do more for the left than any stated policy or messaging or campaign style. I favor mandatory voting as a solution, personally, but even just making it so anyone who cares can vote without headache would do a lot.

    Unfortunately, stamping out voter suppression and making it easier to vote is a relatively hard issue to win elections on, for obvious reasons.

    I agree with this for the most part, but I think its too dangerous to institute mandatory voting (without even getting into the ethical debates about it in a vacuum) for as long as the GOP exists because they will surely use it to attack PoC

    My thinking is that you'll have the GOP undermining the ability of POC to vote no matter what, and that it would take them more effort and leave more evidence with mandatory voting.

    The problem is they'll buck it off to personal responsibility like they do now.

    "Listen, we know that it's everyone' duty to vote, but we can't ignore the risk of voter fraud. Therefore, why are these people being so irresponsible as to fail to get a proper ID so that registrars know they are who they say they are when they show up to vote?"

    The problem with your hope there is it depends on people not buying into the same bullshit they buy into already about voter fraud regulations.

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    edited September 2019
  • Centipede DamascusCentipede Damascus Registered User regular
    I would advocate all-mail voting and ranked choice voting as more effective voting reform proposals than mandatory voting, personally. All-mail voting in states like Oregon and Washington has shown very good results in raising voter participation while cutting down on all the hassle that comes with getting people to polling places and managing the voting machines.

  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    I would advocate all-mail voting and ranked choice voting as more effective voting reform proposals than mandatory voting, personally. All-mail voting in states like Oregon and Washington has shown very good results in raising voter participation while cutting down on all the hassle that comes with getting people to polling places and managing the voting machines.

    There actually wasnt the expected increase in participation for high profile elections, although theres a statistically significant increase in local elections. The downside is downballot races are more likely to be left blank and mail in voting introduces severe vulnerability to election fraud like that which caused the NC 9 do over today.

    Scantron paper ballots and no excuse absentee and/or early voting has fewer downsides IMO

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Okay, we are all getting pretty far from anything that could plausibly be described as discussion of the primary. Let's refocus, or else maybe take a day off while we prepare for the next debate.

    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator mod
    Further to what Jeffe said, we got a shedload of reports yesterday and several of you got warnings for, among other things, being a snarky little shit, posting an image with no context like this was a meme competition, breaking the glorious edict and going far off topic.

    I am so bored of saying the same things and asking you to behave that the problematic posters among you have probably had their last warning, and the next time you decide to drop a CUTTING REMARK of questionable politeness or wander off topic you'll just be kicked from this and future Primary threads. I am absolutely certain those likely to tempt the wrath of whatever from high atop the thing know who they are.

  • LanzLanz ...Za?Registered User regular
    edited September 2019
    Did we cover this? Report from yesterday morning, CBS polling indicates Warren gaining on Biden with Delegates:
    CBS News/YouGov Battleground Tracker found that Warren has gained territory on Biden in an estimate of Democratic National Convention delegates. The former vice president had 600 delegates, compared to Warren's 545. Bernie Sanders rounded out the top three candidates with an estimated 286 delegates.

    When it came to specific early voting states, the tracker showed Warren to be slightly ahead of both Biden and Sanders in New Hampshire. But she was behind her male counterparts in Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada.

    But Warren has benefited the most when it comes to voters switching alliances from other candidates. Twenty-nine percent of former Kamala Harris supporters switched to Warren, while Biden only gained 15 percent of former Harris supporters.s.

    https://www.newsweek.com/elizabeth-warren-vs-joe-biden-2020-polls-1458529

    Lanz on
    waNkm4k.jpg?1
  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    edited September 2019
    Heartlash wrote: »
    Heartlash wrote: »
    In his entire Senate career he's been the primary sponsor of only 7 enacted bills (though he's cosponsored several hundred). It paints a picture of someone who latches onto the real work of others while playing arm chair general to the mob.

    That seems to be exactly what we'd expect for a democratic socialist who had to work with a center right party his entire career.

    Partially, yes. But then many of his proposals, even in the vein of a radical, could've been much more legitimate. I.E. Even if he HAD the votes for some of his bank-breaking legislation it would've fallen flat on implementation.

    Also, I don't want to over-slader Sanders. I admire that he's never cowered away from terms like liberal, progressive, or socialist in public (unlike numerous prior Dem candidates). Instead he’s managed to outline his own version of the script, and people buy into it. I just question his ability to deliver.

    I think you're too dismissive of his cosponsored efforts.

    I can only speak to examples where he "wrote the damn bill" when it comes to his ability to articulate legislative solutions. This is the bill I had my beef with: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s1206/text

    It basically asks the treasury secretary to remodel the entire financial sector. Now, SHOULD the sector be remodeled? Probably. Is it a good idea to punt that responsibility to an individual appointee in the executive with an arbitrary 1 year deadline? No. You have to restructure FINRA, for starters, and that ALONE is more like a 5 year job...

    Honestly Im not terribly fussed about the practicality or lack there of of value signaling proposals. Its why I dont think there's much point to digging into Warren's proposals either beyond a surface level and why "she has a plan!" seems kind of silly to me.

    Is that because of the changes that will happen when trying to pass legislation?

    Because you think the proposals are roughly equivalent in practicality, from your surface level perspective?

    Some other reason?

    Edit: apologies for the quote from pages back, I was catching up and didn't see how far behind I was.

    Tarantio on
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    New Hampshire makes sense just based on its proximity to Massachusetts, and I’m pretty confident Warren will gain support if she has a good showing in Iowa/New Hampshire and people start paying attention.

    Biden has nowhere to go but down and seems like a paper tiger, but I have no idea about Bernie. He already kind of has name recognition from the last election, but it’s whether he can tweak his message to resonate with more voter. I think more than anything his success will depend on early wins. He’s got the ‘loser’ albatross around his neck already, and if he doesn’t do well early on, people will write him off as being a loser again.

  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    Lanz wrote: »
    Did we cover this? Report from yesterday morning, CBS polling indicates Warren gaining on Biden with Delegates:
    CBS News/YouGov Battleground Tracker found that Warren has gained territory on Biden in an estimate of Democratic National Convention delegates. The former vice president had 600 delegates, compared to Warren's 545. Bernie Sanders rounded out the top three candidates with an estimated 286 delegates.

    When it came to specific early voting states, the tracker showed Warren to be slightly ahead of both Biden and Sanders in New Hampshire. But she was behind her male counterparts in Iowa, South Carolina and Nevada.

    But Warren has benefited the most when it comes to voters switching alliances from other candidates. Twenty-nine percent of former Kamala Harris supporters switched to Warren, while Biden only gained 15 percent of former Harris supporters.s.

    https://www.newsweek.com/elizabeth-warren-vs-joe-biden-2020-polls-1458529

    Link to the more detailed story about the poll: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democratic-polls-2020-elizabeth-warren-rises-as-joe-biden-clings-to-delegate-edge-cbs-news-battleground-tracker/

    The poll seems to include the Super Tuesday states, and notably Booker is nowhere to be found in in any of the early-early state polls (Iowa through SC). So outside of storming Fort Kick-Ass in the upcoming debates I think we can stick a fork in him.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • SmrtnikSmrtnik job boli zub Registered User regular
    Kamar wrote: »
    I don't know how many people actually hold the view, but online there's definitely a contingent of support for Sanders that's best understood thus:

    No candidate is moral but Bernie Sanders, because no one else is a socialist. Capitalists are inherently immoral and illegitimate, because capitalism is bad.

    Everything else is just whatever argument works to convince other people in the moment, because there aren't enough socialists to win primaries, much less general elections, with just that.

    Warren is looking like the next person to beat when Biden drops out, so it's time to hunt down an outrage that sticks because the Native thing doesn't have legs.

    Some people might think that's a sketchy way to go about politics, but you must remember that you're only manipulating and tricking capitalists, who are either too ignorant or too evil to be making decisions anyway.

    These jackasses are going to get Trump elected again.

    steam_sig.png
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator mod
    I think people talking about how terrible the supporters of Sanders or Warren or Biden or whomever are instead of talking about the actual candidates are number 1 on the list of things that end up making the thread unpleasant and likely to send the discussion off into snarky, resentful, sniping posts.

  • MancingtomMancingtom Registered User regular
    Are there any people you would’ve liked to see run but didn’t?

    I wanted Sen. Duckworth to run, but I’m not sure she wants it/thinks she’s ready.

  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited September 2019


    Polling shows the top 5 all bearing Trump but by differing margins. Biden by 15(!), Bernie by 9, Warren and Harris by 7 and Pete by 4. This helps bolster Biden's electability argument.

    The question is why. It's a very difficult thing to figure it out I think.

    Is Biden too because of his more moderate ideology? That makes Bernie being 9 with Harrid and Warren 7 and Pete 4 make less sense.

    Name recognition might be it but how long is that viable as an argument? Experience/age would be related with Biden and Bernie the oldest follower by Warren, then Harris then Pete. And Biden and Bernie are the old straight white men, maybe with Bernie getting partial credit because he's not Christian and/or is Jewish. Its smart to never rule out sexism/misogyny/homophobia.

    A strong plurality of D voters are primarily concerned with picking the candidate most likely to beat Trump (and I can't totally blame them) and if these kinds of results keep happening it's hard to argue against that being Biden. We can point to his gaffes and his possible mental slowdown and they can point to it not seeming to matter. We can point to him being less liberal and they can point to him being closer to the median/mean Dem and general election voter anyway.

    I personally hope one of the 4 candidates I think are clearly above the rest can make a real move in these next few debates because the window seems smaller and smaller

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    It's a nationwide poll, so about the only think I'd take away from it is that Biden is the only candidate that actually seems to take voters away from Trump. Everyone else is basically in margin of error land of each other with Trump hanging at his normal 43-44% floor of support. Warren and Harris need to do more work on their favorable/unfavorable numbers, but they've got time and a lot of undecideds to work with there.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    It's a nationwide poll, so about the only think I'd take away from it is that Biden is the only candidate that actually seems to take voters away from Trump.

    I'm skeptical about the sincerity of these people. I'd guess that they are people that don't like the boorishness and idiocy of Trump, and are toying with the idea of voting Democrat, but when push comes to shove, Fox will do some articles about taxes and scary immigrants and they will quietly vote Trump in the privacy of the voting booth and then say they didn't. Meanwhile, all the socialists and young people are sitting at home fuming about being shoved out of the party in the hopes of getting the votes of their racist parents.

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Some portion of respondents want to be seen as predicting right and say the candidate they think will win, but end up voting differently in private

  • AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    edited September 2019
    daveNYC wrote: »
    It's a nationwide poll, so about the only think I'd take away from it is that Biden is the only candidate that actually seems to take voters away from Trump.

    I'm skeptical about the sincerity of these people. I'd guess that they are people that don't like the boorishness and idiocy of Trump, and are toying with the idea of voting Democrat, but when push comes to shove, Fox will do some articles about taxes and scary immigrants and they will quietly vote Trump in the privacy of the voting booth and then say they didn't. Meanwhile, all the socialists and young people are sitting at home fuming about being shoved out of the party in the hopes of getting the votes of their racist parents.

    While I agree on this, the socialists/young people have low clout with the party because they don't vote. Sitting at home doesn't pull the party towards you, never have never will. Turning out gives you power, like how evangelicals, anti-intellectuals and old people call the shots in the GOP. But no one is beating Trump by double digits regardless and Biden will be a terrible campaigner and president.


    Data journalist for The Economist.

    I know it wouldn't be a good look and might upset a lot of people, but some part of me thinks if Warren agreed to let Sanders take the top of the ticket with her as the VP if she wins the nomination, that ticket would have a higher chance of winning because of sexism and because Sanders draws in a big demographic that needs to vote in higher numbers. Sanders is simply too old to be a VP.

    Absalon on
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    edited September 2019
    Edit: Nah.

    If Warren wins, it would be a miscarriage of democracy to give the ticket to someone else.

    You wanna talk depressed turnout? How about the winner giving the ticket to someone who didn’t win?

    joshofalltrades on
  • AbsalonAbsalon Lands of Always WinterRegistered User regular
    edited September 2019
    What if this "pact" was announced before any states actually have their primary voting? Stop me if this sidelines the intention of the thread or is too ludicrous, I'm just concerned since Sanders is too old but any other VP pick for a potential Warren candidate will be a bit too weak for the general. I guess it wouldn't work anyway, because Warren voters wouldn't go over to Sanders even if she agreed to drop out now in exchange for a guaranteed spot as VP if Sanders wins.

    Absalon on
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Warren has lots of potentially good picks.

    Castro would be a very good pick for her.

    Beto would probably be less good but it doesn’t take anybody out of an important Senate seat like giving the ticket to Bernie and losing her seat for a weak VP position would.

    There are others, as well.

  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    Absalon wrote: »
    What if this "pact" was announced before any states actually have their primary voting? Stop me if this sidelines the intention of the thread or is too ludicrous, I'm just concerned since Sanders is too old but any other VP pick for a potential Warren candidate will be a bit too weak for the general. I guess it wouldn't work anyway, because Warren voters wouldn't go over to Sanders even if she agreed to drop out now in exchange for a guaranteed spot as VP if Sanders wins.

    I don't think "A vote for me is a vote for my opponent." would ever be a good campaign slogan. Baring anything crazy I think it's more likely that post-Super Tuesday will see some deal making happen.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    Absalon wrote: »
    What if this "pact" was announced before any states actually have their primary voting? Stop me if this sidelines the intention of the thread or is too ludicrous, I'm just concerned since Sanders is too old but any other VP pick for a potential Warren candidate will be a bit too weak for the general. I guess it wouldn't work anyway, because Warren voters wouldn't go over to Sanders even if she agreed to drop out now in exchange for a guaranteed spot as VP if Sanders wins.

    I don't think "A vote for me is a vote for my opponent." would ever be a good campaign slogan. Baring anything crazy I think it's more likely that post-Super Tuesday will see some deal making happen.

    Last primary for our congressional seat the DNC favored candidate basically said that at one point, in a debate, to defend how she and her opponent were practically the same!

    Yeah, she lost that primary.

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    If Harris finds herself in a situation where it's pragmatic for her to drop out prior to Super Tuesday it may increase her likelihood of a VP or senior cabinet position promise considerably. If CA remains a close race her endorsement could easily shift it.

    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Absalon wrote: »
    What if this "pact" was announced before any states actually have their primary voting? Stop me if this sidelines the intention of the thread or is too ludicrous, I'm just concerned since Sanders is too old but any other VP pick for a potential Warren candidate will be a bit too weak for the general. I guess it wouldn't work anyway, because Warren voters wouldn't go over to Sanders even if she agreed to drop out now in exchange for a guaranteed spot as VP if Sanders wins.

    Sanders would never take the VP spot. He's too proud. And old. If Warren won, she'd want someone who doesn't scare the center. Buttigeig, perhaps.

  • YamiB.YamiB. Registered User regular
    Kamar wrote: »
    I'm glad neither Sanders nor Warren is shitty wrt SA or Israel.

    Biden and Harris are...less impressive, on our shittier allies.

    Has Warren gotten better on Israel? I always considered that a big negative about her. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-defends_n_5733164

  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    Heartlash wrote: »
    If Harris finds herself in a situation where it's pragmatic for her to drop out prior to Super Tuesday it may increase her likelihood of a VP or senior cabinet position promise considerably. If CA remains a close race her endorsement could easily shift it.

    California has the Governor appoint a replacement Senator so this would be acceptable.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    Castro and Abrams are the two best apparent VP picks out there right now for pretty much every candidate save maybe Booker or Harris.

    RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
    Come Overwatch with meeeee
  • Stabbity StyleStabbity Style He/Him | Warning: Mothership Reporting Kennewick, WARegistered User regular
    Mancingtom wrote: »
    Are there any people you would’ve liked to see run but didn’t?

    I wanted Sen. Duckworth to run, but I’m not sure she wants it/thinks she’s ready.

    Nah, Warren was who I wanted last time and she's running this time, so I'm good.

    Stabbity_Style.png
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Warren is going to run roughshod over Biden tomorrow night. He's bad at thinking on his feet and she excels at it.

    Hopefully some frontrunners finally getting to meet in a debate puts things in a starker contrast.

  • BrainleechBrainleech 機知に富んだコメントはここにあります Registered User regular
    Warren is going to run roughshod over Biden tomorrow night. He's bad at thinking on his feet and she excels at it.

    Hopefully some frontrunners finally getting to meet in a debate puts things in a starker contrast.

    I feel Harris can go out with a bang taking Biden out as she found the holes in his armor and went for it

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Brainleech wrote: »
    Warren is going to run roughshod over Biden tomorrow night. He's bad at thinking on his feet and she excels at it.

    Hopefully some frontrunners finally getting to meet in a debate puts things in a starker contrast.

    I feel Harris can go out with a bang taking Biden out as she found the holes in his armor and went for it

    At this point she needs to focus more on making an affirmative case for herself than dragging Joe down. She's straddling so many fences right now it's going to take hours to get the splinters out, but even if those are her non-focus-tested, cynically-political positions, she is in dire need of a strong thesis statement.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    I wouldn't be surprised if Harris gets another bump just to see it melt away

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    Harris had the perfect chance to define her campaign and squandered. She could only be so lucky to get a second chance.

    RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
    Come Overwatch with meeeee
  • Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Brainleech wrote: »
    Warren is going to run roughshod over Biden tomorrow night. He's bad at thinking on his feet and she excels at it.

    Hopefully some frontrunners finally getting to meet in a debate puts things in a starker contrast.

    I feel Harris can go out with a bang taking Biden out as she found the holes in his armor and went for it

    At this point she needs to focus more on making an affirmative case for herself than dragging Joe down. She's straddling so many fences right now it's going to take hours to get the splinters out, but even if those are her non-focus-tested, cynically-political positions, she is in dire need of a strong thesis statement.

    I believe brainleech's argument - which I agree with, if so - is that Harris is just about done, and the most good she can do at this point is ripping into Biden and taking him out of the race as well.

  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    Heartlash wrote: »
    If Harris finds herself in a situation where it's pragmatic for her to drop out prior to Super Tuesday it may increase her likelihood of a VP or senior cabinet position promise considerably. If CA remains a close race her endorsement could easily shift it.

    California has the Governor appoint a replacement Senator so this would be acceptable.

    And now I'm imagining him appointing himself because I think that's what Newsom wants. Heh.

This discussion has been closed.