US Elections 2020

[blackchubby38]

Isn't that what they did last time? Trump's election shows that a lot of people were unhappy enough with the existing state of affairs in the USA that they voted for someone who promised to disrupt it. I'm not entirely convinced that the right approach is to be cautious and essentially promise to do not much more than restore the pre-Trump status quo.

One thing we should have learnt is recent years is that conventional wisdoms are often wrong. I really have no idea how Bernie Sanders will go if he gets the nomination, but I'm pretty sure most of the people saying he is unelectable were also saying the same about Trump in 2016.

While restoring the pre-Trump status quo may not be the right approach, the same can be said for going in the opposite direction.

When it comes to Sanders electability, there seems to be a few trains of thought on that:

1. Trump wants him to lose the Democratic nomination, so he can appeal to his voters by saying the contest was rigged and that Sanders was robbed. Apparently Sanders has some appeal with working class white voters. Given how upset some Sanders supporters were in the last election, I can see that happening. Especially since Sanders is the one candidate Trump hasn't said anything negative about yet.

2. Trump wants him to win the nomination because he knows he is so far to the left, that will turn off certain voters who will either vote for him or stay home on Election Day.

3. There are some Republicans who are actually worried about Sanders winning the nomination because they think he can become a force like Trump was in 2016 and win the whole thing.

4. There is a notion that the 2020 Presidential Election can be reminiscent of the recent UK one for Prime Minister and have the same result.

[filghy2]

Is a third party probable?

There's always third party candidates, bu they have no realistic chance. The only one who has ever got close was Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, and he had been a popular President.

[filghy2]

4. There is a notion that the 2020 Presidential Election can be reminiscent of the recent UK one for Prime Minister and have the same result.

There are definitely some similarities with Jeremy Corbyn, though there is US no equivalent to the Brexit issue that dominated UK politics. It's a worry that Sanders seems to have the same tendency to stubbornness and poor judgement on some things - eg not being willing to back away from past praise of left-wing dictatorships.

The Democratic Party will face a very difficult situation if Sanders wins a plurality of delegates but the majority are split between various moderate candidates. They would have to either give it to someone who was not supported by a majority of his party, or give it to someone else and face a civil war.

[broncofan]

There are definitely some similarities with Jeremy Corbyn, though there is US no equivalent to the Brexit issue that dominated UK politics. It's a worry that Sanders seems to have the same tendency to stubbornness and poor judgement on some things - eg not being willing to back away from past praise of left-wing dictatorships.

The things he's said haven't been terrible but it plays into the wrong narrative. He can be very reasonable on foreign policy issues but he also has to worry about people to the left who might see criticism of left-wing dictatorships as a betrayal. In the long-run he probably should worry more about scaring people by not condemning the excesses of left-wing regimes clearly enough, particularly given the threats some of his supporters have made online.

Take for example this criticism of Xi of China by Bernie Sanders.

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/st...74541596626944

The response that sticks out to me is "authoritarianism is when you do things American doesn't like" with nearly a thousand likes. There's tons of room to point out the U.S.' hypocrisy on all foreign policy issues. But is there room to question whether China has an authoritarian government? I actually think if Bernie can avoid saying anything that runs in a loop on fox news, there is nothing objectively scary about his foreign policy views.

He's also done a lot of good when it comes to the Israel-Palestine issue. He is boycotting the AIPAC conference, which many of the other candidates have decided to follow suit with. AIPAC frequently has Islamophobic speakers and promotes the sorts of policies that thwart a peaceful resolution on the Israel-Palestine issue. Pretty soon they will not be able to tout themselves as a "bipartisan" organization. He has also said he will cut aid to Israel or use that threat to deter human rights abuses. This is a reasonable and productive policy that could lead to results, but is it vitriolic enough for people with a hammer and sickle in their twitter profile?

The similarity between Corbyn and Sanders has less to do with their particular positions and more to do with how the people who like them view them. They are indispensable. There is no close substitute. They are pure beyond question and have lived lives of selfless sacrifice. People who criticize them must be motivated by pure self-interest or be corrupt. People who criticize them deserve to demonized and humiliated without restraint.

[filghy2]

The response that sticks out to me is "authoritarianism is when you do things American doesn't like" with nearly a thousand likes. There's tons of room to point out the U.S.' hypocrisy on all foreign policy issues. But is there room to question whether China has an authoritarian government? I actually think if Bernie can avoid saying anything that runs in a loop on fox news, there is nothing objectively scary about his foreign policy views.

I agree that his overall positions are more reasonable than is often presented, but (like Corbyn) he seems to find it hard to avoid saying things that give the wrong impression in isolation. Trying to be authentic and avoid playing the media's and your opponents' game is understandable, but there is a point where this becomes naive and foolish.

For all his success in the primaries so far, it's worth bearing in mind that the polls still show that 70% of Democrats prefer another candidate. If the moderates had been been able to unite around one candidate he would probably be in a similar position to last time.

[Stavros]

And so they came, and went. I guess the question is, if it is to be Biden or Sanders, will their voters endorse the other candidate? I am assuming Bloomberg is too out of touch with the grass roots, and Warren is best of the rest but not the best-?

[AlexisDVyne]

And so they came, and went. I guess the question is, if it is to be Biden or Sanders, will their voters endorse the other candidate? I am assuming Bloomberg is too out of touch with the grass roots, and Warren is best of the rest but not the best-?

The establishment is doing everything it can & buying everything possible to convince voters to be happy about Biden. He was the DNC's original choice & already has ALL of the super delegate votes..

The thing is, if they cheat Bernie again the dotard is GUARANTEED to win and the Democratic party will implode..

If Bernie voters (youth, millennial, genX & genZ) get cheated they'll stay home or revolt..

Tomorrow is a BIG DAY!

[Stavros]

The establishment is doing everything it can & buying everything possible to convince voters to be happy about Biden. He was the DNC's original choice & already has ALL of the super delegate votes..
The thing is, if they cheat Bernie again the dotard is GUARANTEED to win and the Democratic party will implode..
If Bernie voters (youth, millennial, genX & genZ) get cheated they'll stay home or revolt..
Tomorrow is a BIG DAY!

Yes, But. As in: Bernie Sanders has never run for election as a Democrat or a Socialist, yet seeks the Democrat nomination when he should be running as an independent, like Ross Perot did. To say the DNC is more than annoyed with Sanders is an under-statement but it is understandable in the circumstances, and if his supporters don't turn out for Biden, it will be as if he was indeed a third party candidate splitting the Democrat/anti-Trump vote, handing victory to the worst President in American history, impeached for violating his Oath of Office and Obstructing Justice. This is isn't even about who the best candidate is, but the daft system you Americans have for choosing leaders. In the UK parties have memberships with annual fees, registation cards, and you can't become a local councillor let alone an MP unless you are a member of the party. The Democrats -and the Republcans- can thus be hi-jacked by people with no proven loyalty to the party whose leadership they seek. This to me is plain stupid.
I guess it was part of the American Dream: anyone can be President, because it is an open system and does not filter out the nutcases through a strict selection procedure. Then a true nutcase came along and the American Dream has become a managerial nightmare.
So Warren drops out, and its Bernie -vs- Joe. At what point does either have to make the choice to concede, or are they going to take this to the Convention? I don't see Biden dropping out. Is it now all about Bernie?

[blackchubby38]

And so they came, and went. I guess the question is, if it is to be Biden or Sanders, will their voters endorse the other candidate? I am assuming Bloomberg is too out of touch with the grass roots, and Warren is best of the rest but not the best-?

I could see some Biden voters endorsing Sanders, but I can't see it happening the other way around. Especially when Bernie Sanders is going around saying that the "Democratic establishment" is fixing things for the Biden to win the nomination. I can also tell that people like Bill de Blasio and "the Squad" are going to be a problem if Sanders doesn't win the nomination.

Maybe Bernie should stop putting the blame on the "Democratic establishment" and starting placing it on his supposed base of young voters who didn't come and out vote for him on Tuesday.

[Stavros]

I could see some Biden voters endorsing Sanders, but I can't see it happening the other way around. Especially when Bernie Sanders is going around saying that the "Democratic establishment" is fixing things for the Biden to win the nomination. I can also tell that people like Bill de Blasio and "the Squad" are going to be a problem if Sanders doesn't win the nomination.
Maybe Bernie should stop putting the blame on the "Democratic establishment" and starting placing it on his supposed base of young voters who didn't come and out vote for him on Tuesday.

The point of interest being now perhaps the supporters as much as the candidates.
Two views of Biden: Ben Judah sees the weakness in a lack of policy, a lack of appetite for change in a political system that needs the Democrat version of it; and Jonathan Freedand, for whom Biden becomes the man you can trust in a crisis.

Ben Judah here-
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...emocratic-ussr

Jonathan Freedand here-
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...shington-obama