You're delusional and stupid all rolles up into one with a pathetic imagination to boot.
and when he was recently asked if he would push through a vote on a supreme court justice if a vacancy opened up during this last year of trump's term he gave a quick, confident "YES"
when it was mentioned that following obama's term there were a shocking amount of judicial vacancies he said it was "because i was controlling the senate, thats why"
he's a ing turd to put it lightly
he keeps qualifying for debates because he's dumping massive amounts of money into the early states and dem debate qualifications allow you to get in if you're getting 7% on any 2 early state polls
the thought of anybody buying their way into office is a complete mockery of the office. its one thing if its through fundraising because of overwhelming support... another if ur just rich and can spend assloads of money. bloomberg is worse
but yeah i would def say at in his debate appearances he does appear genuine. just delusional about his chances because nobody knows who the he is
Among others, sure.
they seem to draw your ire disproportionately tbh
It's mainly lip service and good strategically. The fact that you progressives don't understand this is one of the main reasons you guys do so astronomically bad in red and purple districts
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...hat-do-n933771
I mean you guys did horrible in 2018 anywhere outside of safe blue districts. Beyond horrible.
There's a reason of the 4 people in that knock down the house movie
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/knock_down_the_house
We only talk about AOC and it's because the other 3 weren't running in the Bronx and they lost by like 30 points each
taking the L against trump is a much bigger lol than the midterm results
Of course Republicans will try to smear anyone who runs as a Socialist but it will be much less effective on Biden. As for Twitter while I spend a lot of time since I have a job while I have to sit in front of the computer it's really very irrelevant as it a horrible misrepresentation of the Democratic base: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...real-life.html
There is a funny Twitter Bernie Democrat joke thing called "Cuomo's Law" which is a joke about the online left views of normal Dems is the opposite of reality. It got this name as when Cynthia Nixon primaried Cuomo everyone thought she had a chance because she was super popular in twitter and everyone there hate him. None of the progressives on there could figure out how anyone would vote for him. Meanwhile he won by 35 points lmao. Like he won every group: young, old, black, white, gays etc.
We had an election in 2018 and you guys the bed and us moderates saved you.
Please win a few elections outside of D +30 districts before you lecture on how to turn West Virginia socialist
What a load. It was extremely effective against Clinton.
Well, they're pretty vocal petulant es, so sure.
who ended up toeing the line about as well as one could expect or hope
katie porter flipped CA-45 which had literally never had a democrat rep since it became a district in 1983, so theres one (was R +17 in 2016)
katie hill (revenge porn) also flipped CA-25, which had been republican since 1992
even though beto's record is generally far from progressive, he essentially campaigned and ran as one against cruz and actually turned that into a race... its fair to credit the turnout he generated to some of the other dem texas wins
Last edited by spurraider21; 01-11-2020 at 02:26 AM.
I don't think incorporation as a state and voting representation in the US Congress for Washington DC iare delusional, stupid or pathetic.
The words I would use are equitable and fair. Why should inhabitants of DC remain second class citizens politically?
DC is more as populous than Wyoming and about the same as North Dakota. Why should it have any less repreaentation and self-determination?
So then Hillary for not bothering to campaign in Wisconsin and allowing Trump to win it with even less votes than romney got in Wisconsin in 2012, right?
I don’t view Steyer buying his way into office as any more reprehensible than he Kochs choosing a puppet candidate and buying his way into office, and if Steyer will enact meaningful ways to address climate change it’s a means to an end. Bloomberg OTOH is doing this purely for ego reasons and I’d enjoy seeing him die in a gas chamber.
All this is true. I was partially basing my comment on some anecdotal evidence. I’ve talked with a few people that voted Trump and have indicated they wouldn’t do that again. Granted, at the time there were more Dems in the race that they liked. My guess is they likely just won’t vote.
Lots of good survey info here. One takeaway is that one should be wary of assuming candidates draw their support from completely distinct pools.
https://projects.economist.com/democ...rimaries-2020/
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/...n-sanders.htmlIn 2018, Democratic candidates waded into hostile territory and flipped 40 House districts, many of them moderate or conservative in their makeup. In almost every instance, their formula centered on narrowing their target profile by avoiding controversial positions, and focusing obsessively on Republican weaknesses, primarily Donald Trump’s abuses of power and attempts to eliminate health insurance for millions of Americans.
The Democratic presidential field has largely abandoned that model. Working from the premise that the country largely agrees with them on everything, or that agreeing with the majority of voters on issues is not necessary to win, the campaign has proceeded in blissful unawareness of the extremely high chance that Trump will win again.
A new batch of swing state polls from the New York Times ought to deliver a bracing shock to Democrats. The polls find that, in six swing states — Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona — Trump is highly compe ive. He trails Joe Biden there by the narrowest of margins, and leads Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
Normally, it is a mistake to overreact to the findings of a single poll. In general, an outlier result should only marginally nudge our preexisting understanding of where public opinion stands. This case is different. To see why, you need to understand two interrelated flaws in the 2016 polling. First, they tended to under-sample white voters without college degrees. And this made them especially vulnerable to polling misses in a handful of states with disproportionately large numbers of white non-college voters. The Times found several months ago that Trump might well win 270 Electoral College votes even in the face of a larger national vote defeat than he suffered in 2016.
All this is to say that, if you’ve been relying on national polls for your picture of the race, you’re probably living in la-la land. However broadly unpopular Trump may be, at the moment he is right on the cusp of victory.
What about the fact Democrats crushed Trump’s party in the midterms? The new Times polling finds many of those voters are swinging back. Almost two-thirds of the people who supported Trump in 2016, and then a Democrat in the 2018 midterms, plan to vote for Trump again in 2020.
Perhaps some of that movement represents a desire by voters to check Trump’s power and restore divided government. But the poll contains substantial evidence that Trump’s party lost the midterms for the hoary yet true reason that Republicans took unpopular positions, especially on health care, and ceded the center. Rather than learn the lesson, Democrats instead appear intent on ceding it right back to them.
The “center,” of course, is a somewhat hazy concept, subject both to overinterpretation and misinterpretation. Capturing the center isn’t the only reason politicians win elections, and some policies that Washington elites consider “radical” are in fact popular. Nonetheless, it really is true that there are a bunch of persuadable voters who can be pushed away from a party based on their perception that it’s too radical.
And the Democratic presidential primary has been a disaster on this front. The debate has taken shape within a world formed by Twitter, in which the country is poised to leap into a new cultural and economic revolution, and even large chunks of the Democratic Party’s elected officials and voting base have fallen behind the times. As my colleague Ed Kilgore argues, the party’s left-wing intelligentsia have treated any appeals to voters in the center as a sign of being behind the times.
Hmmm if only there was a candidate who basically told the twitterati left to go itself. Maybe an older guy, kind of folksy. Whose followers were off twitter and didnt give a about it....
...whose brain is falling out of his head as we watch.
Almost wishing Bernie wins just to see AaronY meltdown...
Aaron is in Shillary mode, tbh, which is what cost the democrats the last election... "Yeah, she's obnoxious, stands for nothing, neocon, warmoger, globalist, unlikeable, unappealing, but you should positively go vote for her because radical socialism or conserva s!"
It's the same exact thing with Biden this time around.
The problem with that thinking is that quite a bit of the dems demographics (especially young people) are idealistic, and rather not vote than go vote for the 'lesser of two evils'.
It's not a personal criticism towards Aaron, just pointing out the realities of the electorate.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
