• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

Deacfreak07 said:
Attacking trump gains literally nothing politically. If you voted for this mother fucker last time, you’ll do it again. Every penny of spending after this primary needs to be focused on getting out the vote. Specifically getting young folks and minorities engaged enough to turn out. Bernie can definitely do that whether or not he’s the nominee. I just don’t want any of these candidates to take their ball and go home after we have a nominee. We know we can’t rely on the courage of moderates to turn out or flip enough votes.
Click to expand...

Trump certainly lost alot of Suburban support in 2018 when a lot of moderate house districts flipped.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Reasoned analysis? Reasoned analysis would be trying to come up with some legitimate reason why Sanders apparently polls high in these popular politician polls but yet can't get any real Traction in the primary that you would expect a very popular politician to do.

I mean your answer that the DNC is rigged against Sanders and that the media is conspiring against them plays well with Fanboys like townie but really isn't very compelling.

Elections are essentially popularity contests and it just seems bizarre to me that the most popular politician couldn't win the nomination in the left leaning ideological party with ideas that his supporters claim are very popular.
Click to expand...

Just because you don't agree with or don't like my analysis doesn't make it illegitimate. I don't think any fair-minded person would claim my reasoning or assumptions were preposterous or tin-foil hat, conspiracy level as you seem to suggest. I also think it could be that people who participate in the primaries are a specific subset of the larger population who may tilt towards the older crowd, who traditionally are more conservative. Very likely both.

I don't know your political views but you clearly have an axe to grind with Sanders. And you keep saying conspire, making it seem like I think editors in the media are holding secret meetings in boardrooms plotting up ways to screw Bernie. The DNC was rigged last time, but I didn't claim it was rigged this time (I didn't bring up the DNC at all). So good job misrepresenting my position twice in one sentence. Would make for better discussion if we all applied the principle of charity.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Trump certainly lost alot of Suburban support in 2018 when a lot of moderate house districts flipped.
Click to expand...

He wasn’t on the ballot. Our short attention spans tend to do that in midterms.

The economy is probably coming back to earth before 2024, so I guess the silver lining of him getting relented is that progressive policies won’t be blamed as much.
 
Section2mankini said:
Just because you don't agree with or don't like my analysis doesn't make it illegitimate. I don't think any fair-minded person would claim my reasoning or assumptions were preposterous or tin-foil hat, conspiracy level as you seem to suggest. I also think it could be that people who participate in the primaries are a specific subset of the larger population who may tilt towards the older crowd, who traditionally are more conservative. Very likely both.

I don't know your political views but you clearly have an axe to grind with Sanders. And you keep saying conspire, making it seem like I think editors in the media are holding secret meetings in boardrooms plotting up ways to screw Bernie. The DNC was rigged last time, but I didn't claim it was rigged this time (I didn't bring up the DNC at all). So good job misrepresenting my position twice in one sentence. Would make for better discussion if we all applied the principle of charity.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry the claim from Sanders supporters at the DNC was rigged and cost him the election is nonsense he lost because a lot more people voted for Hillary Clinton it wasn't even close. He benefited from being the only alternative that people really didn't pay much attention to or negatively campaigned against. And you did bring that up in this discussion today on this thread.

I'm not a big fan of Sanders politics. I think he was pretty much worthless in the private sector and never accomplished anything and he's become very successful demagoguing against business and capital interests. And he has cultivated a groups of supporters that default to conspiracy theories to explain his lack of democratic presidential electoral success which dovetailed nicely with Russian propaganda. Open revolt at the democratic convention last year?
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
I do think the capitalism is horrible message during a booming stock market low unemployment Rising medium income environment is a tough sell. Sanders message strategically would be a lot more effective at the middle of a recession depression type situation
Click to expand...

Skip ahead to 1:40 to hear the part about the economy. Isn't it weird we don't get this sort of analysis in liberal MSM? Instead it comes from frickin' FoxNews warning Trump about the threat of Sanders.

 
ChrisL68 said:
I'm sorry the claim from Sanders supporters at the DNC was rigged and cost him the election is nonsense he lost because a lot more people voted for Hillary Clinton it wasn't even close. He benefited from being the only alternative that people really didn't pay much attention to or negatively campaigned against. And you did bring that up in this discussion today on this thread.

I'm not a big fan of Sanders politics. I think he was pretty much worthless in the private sector and never accomplished anything and he's become very successful demagoguing against business and capital interests. And he has cultivated a groups of supporters that default to conspiracy theories to explain his lack of democratic presidential electoral success which dovetailed nicely with Russian propaganda. Open revolt at the democratic convention last year?
Click to expand...

It's not a claim that the DNC was rigged. It was. It's a separate argument whether it cost Sanders the election. One I won't make because no one knows. I won't respond to the rest of your post because to use your own words, it's nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Section2mankini said:
Skip ahead to 1:40 to hear the part about the economy. Isn't it weird we don't get this sort of analysis in liberal MSM? Instead it comes from frickin' FoxNews warning Trump about the threat of Sanders.

Click to expand...


So you are claiming that progressive MSM never discusses M4A or the student debt burden? That's ridiculous.
 
Section2mankini said:
It's not a claim that the DNC was rigged. It was. It's a separate argument whether it cost Sanders the election. One I won't make because no one knows. I won't respond to the rest of your post because to use your own words, it's nonsense.
Click to expand...

There was a few random emails of DNC people well after the nomination had been decided decrying the damage that Sanders was doing to the inevitable nominee that was leaked by Russian propaganda sources desperate to sow discord and to convince alot of progressives to question the party. It was apparently very successful.

Sanders problem was his inability to do well in primary states where he had to drive the vote. In caucuses where he could rely on the commitment of his core followers, he did great.
 
ChrisL68 said:
So you are claiming that progressive MSM never discusses M4A or the student debt burden? That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Please stop misrepresenting my positions. There is no such thing as progressive MSM. And no, that's not what I claimed. Liberal MSM (CNN, MSNBC) discusses those things, but when talking about the Democratic nominees and their electability, I've yet to see type of analysis Carlson provides here which explains Bernie's economic appeal to many people on both the left and the right, which you seem willfully blind to.
 
RJ and Whatamount are literally just posting the same shit with every post at this point.
 
ChrisL68 said:
There was a few random emails of DNC people well after the nomination had been decided decrying the damage that Sanders was doing to the inevitable nominee that was leaked by Russian propaganda sources desperate to sow discord and to convince alot of progressives to question the party. It was apparently very successful.

Sanders problem was his inability to do well in primary states where he had to drive the vote. In caucuses where he could rely on the commitment of his core followers, he did great.
Click to expand...

Once she was at the party's helm, Brazile wrote that she discovered an agreement that "specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party's finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff."
Click to expand...

https://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/561976645/clinton-campaign-had-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015
 
Running against the economy is a good strategy to get votes from the many people who haven’t seen gains during this great economy. It worked for Republicans four years ago.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Attacking trump gains literally nothing politically. If you voted for this mother fucker last time, you’ll do it again. Every penny of spending after this primary needs to be focused on getting out the vote. Specifically getting young folks and minorities engaged enough to turn out. Bernie can definitely do that whether or not he’s the nominee. I just don’t want any of these candidates to take their ball and go home after we have a nominee. We know we can’t rely on the courage of moderates to turn out or flip enough votes.
Click to expand...

Without question getting out the vote is absolutely critical. Unfortunately, part of that is giving people the reason to vote. His racism can bring out lots of votes in PA, MI, FL, WI. This needs to drilled into everyone's life in those states.

However, the 18 election did disprove part of your thesis. Millions of people who voted for Trump changed the House and state governments. Tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions, need to be spent in swing states hammering Trump on healthcare. This is an issue that will change votes. Showing him saying he'd protect pre-existing conditions needs to split-screened with the DOJ trying to kill ACA in court.

There needs to be a few platoons of social media teams. The more attacks on him. The more likely he will lose it and go crazy on Twitter and other social media.

You don't beat bully without staring him down.
 
Sanders has some support, but it is still pretty limited.

I don't think that Joe Biden is a particularly strong candidate.

You would think that Sanders with his 16 momentum would be able to compete, but here he sits trailing Biden by 10 points nationally.

I think the idea that he would peel off a bunch of right wing support from Trump is just fanciful.
 
Section2mankini said:
https://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/5619...-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015
Click to expand...

they jumped the gun on some of the financing arrangements because the DNC was desperate for cash and they knew, rightly, that Sanders wasn't a serious contender for the nomination. It wasn't like that funding was spent advertising during the primary. It was setting up the strategy and funding for the general election.

I think the Democratic party made a mistake focusing too much on HRC in 2016 which breathed alot of life into Sander's campaign. She would have been better served to compete in a more competitive primary and Sanders was the huge beneficiary of that. But the democratic primary was over on Super Tuesday and Sanders had no chance in any of those southern states with the ground game he had built. He was a very successful protest candidate.

And here we are 4 years later and Sanders is again going to get destroyed in those southern states. What's his excuse this time?
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
they jumped the gun on some of the financing arrangements because the DNC was desperate for cash and they knew, rightly, that Sanders wasn't a serious contender for the nomination. It wasn't like that funding was spent advertising during the primary. It was setting up the strategy and funding for the general election.

I think the Democratic party made a mistake focusing too much on HRC in 2016 which breathed alot of life into Sander's campaign. She would have been better served to compete in a more competitive primary and Sanders was the huge beneficiary of that. But the democratic primary was over on Super Tuesday and Sanders had no chance in any of those southern states with the ground game he had built. He was a very successful protest candidate.

And here we are 4 years later and Sanders is again going to get destroyed in those southern states. What's his excuse this time?
Click to expand...

And I'm the one engaging in "amazing levels of rationalization"? I'll just take Townie's advice. Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Section2mankini said:
And I'm the one engaging in "amazing levels of rationalization"? I just take Townie's advice. Jesus.
Click to expand...

So just curious, without advertising, how do you think the DNC, which is honestly not a very powerful organization, convinced many more people to vote for Clinton than Sanders.

The establishment overwhelmingly supported her including all of the party elders and movers/shakers. But that isn't rigging anything. That was the fact that she was, you know, actually a life long democrat and had established connections over decades in the party and was running on the heels of a two term democrat.

So the DNC jumped the gun in setting up its structure and financing for the general election once the serious contenders for the nomination decided not to challenge HRC. And all of the structure that Clinton controlled didn't start until after the nomination was decided. Nothing was rigged. There was nothing to rig.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top