US Elections 2020

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Have I underestimated Amy Klobuchar? Truth is, I don't know who she is, can anyone enlighten me,

---

I also did even though a few people have told me they like her. It's difficult to find a lot of articles spelling out her positions but I'll link a couple of profiles. Matthew Yglesias says she has a "dorky midwestern shtick" but I think she comes across as sincere and it's not "shtick" which implies contrivance. The vox article says she supports an expansion of our public health care option without it being medicare for all, and she supports measures to curb climate change without a ban on fracking. She has moved to the center to distinguish herself from Sanders and Warren and has said she wants to build a big tent for the party.

Yet she also has a lot of accomplishments as a legislator that you can see in the second link, a Wikipedia of her positions. She "passed more legislation than any other senator by the end of the 114th Congress in late 2016." So while she may be labelled more of a moderate, she gets things done.

https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/211339...hire-electable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politi...ar#Agriculture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

Edit: the article posted by filghy says Bloomberg opposed financial reforms in 2008. It's fairly obvious that deregulation and lax regulation leads to financial crises so that's a particularly bad sign.

---

It's a concern that some of his policy positions seem to be based on self-interest, though he's not as egregious as Trump. At least he's in favour of higher taxes on the rich.

That said, he might be the candidate best able to beat Trump. I certainly think he would be the opponent Trump most fears. I doubt the stop and frisk thing would hurt him in the swing states they need to win back.

It's interesting that we're all so focused on which candidate would be better able to beat Trump rather than who would make the best president. The man who thinks everything is about him has succeeded in making his opponents' selection process mainly about him. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-donald-trump

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

It's a concern that some of his policy positions seem to be based on self-interest, though he's not as egregious as Trump. At least he's in favour of higher taxes on the rich.

That said, he might be the candidate best able to beat Trump. I certainly think he would be the opponent Trump most fears. I doubt the stop and frisk thing would hurt him in the swing states they need to win back.

---

I actually think Bloomberg would do an okay job. I know money has been an important part of our politics for a while but I don't like the idea of a self-funded campaign by a billionaire. If not for what his campaign says about our process I'm guessing he would be socially liberal and not corrupt like the President, the financial regulation stuff aside, which he has a serious conflict of interest with.

You're right that Trump has us worried about who can beat him rather than what we want but it is an effective form of blackmail. He has destroyed the rule of law at the federal level, most recently with the Roger Stone interference, in a way Richard Nixon couldn't have dreamed of. Every appointment to the Supreme Court takes us to a critical threshold where we may be set back 100 years socially.

A point that I think you've made is that pragmatism doesn't work because nobody can mysterious divine who has the magical quality of "electability" and the exercise sort of dries up any enthusiasm people have for the issues and political movements. That's fair but I haven't been inspired by anyone and I've invested some time. Obama was politically more to the center but I remembered actually liking him very early on. I liked the way he carried himself, liked his story, and he had a presence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

I also did even though a few people have told me they like her. It's difficult to find a lot of articles spelling out her positions but I'll link a couple of profiles. Matthew Yglesias says she has a "dorky midwestern shtick" but I think she comes across as sincere and it's not "shtick" which implies contrivance. The vox article says she supports an expansion of our public health care option without it being medicare for all, and she supports measures to curb climate change without a ban on fracking. She has moved to the center to distinguish herself from Sanders and Warren and has said she wants to build a big tent for the party.

Yet she also has a lot of accomplishments as a legislator that you can see in the second link, a Wikipedia of her positions. She "passed more legislation than any other senator by the end of the 114th Congress in late 2016." So while she may be labelled more of a moderate, she gets things done.

https://www.vox.com/2020/2/11/211339...hire-electable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politi...ar#Agriculture

---

Thanks for your thoughts and the links, she looks to be a successful politician with standard Democrat positions on a lot of issues. The main weakness, if it is true, is her temper or claims of being abusive to her staff. I don't know how true it is or how it compares to the Mandarin who screams and shouts and swears and stamps his feet, when people seem most terrified of a negative tweet. Does she have the charisma that will win doubting voters? Can she deliver a rousing speech, like Obama? Curious, not long before reading your post, I clicked on a Yahoo news link to a Jmmy Kimmel excerpt on the President in which, among other things, he failed to pronounce her name properly, which means he will have to find a nickname to remember who she is. I don't know much about Kimmel but comes across as bland, whatever. Is Klobuchar bland, though? that may be the issue. But on policy she is safe, and maybe after the most reckless first term anyone can remember, safe sounds very very good.
I shall watch her with interest, as one watches that nauseating loud-mouth from Vermont with concern. I mean, you can see the ads already: Vote, Sanders, pay more taxes. Or, Feel the Bern: treble your bills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

It's a concern that some of his policy positions seem to be based on self-interest, though he's not as egregious as Trump. At least he's in favour of higher taxes on the rich.

That said, he might be the candidate best able to beat Trump. I certainly think he would be the opponent Trump most fears. I doubt the stop and frisk thing would hurt him in the swing states they need to win back.

It's interesting that we're all so focused on which candidate would be better able to beat Trump rather than who would make the best president. The man who thinks everything is about him has succeeded in making his opponents' selection process mainly about him. https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-donald-trump

---

Considering the state of NYC since Bloomberg left office, I don't think the stop and frisk thing would hurt him in this city or many other Democratic cities either.

My thoughts on the Dems candidates.. :)

Pete.. This is CIA Pete & he is the symbol of the fascist left.. :loser:

Amy.. WTF is she even doing there? :???:

Warren.. Trying too hard & looks fake & definitely can't beat the dotard.. :smh

Biden.. Wow this guy has issues & should retire yesterday.. :shock:

Bernie.. His ideas are not radical, they are mainstream in the rest of the civilized world.. :rock2

Everyone should help Bernie take America back from the oligarchs, multinationals & fascists.. :geek:

You missed Bloomberg - though I guess you would probably call him a fascist as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

You missed Bloomberg - though I guess you would probably call him a fascist as well

---

Boomerberg is a republican.. and he's more of an oligarch.. :geek:

Attachment 1232563

The problem is that is is the USA and its politicians seem always to have something there in the past, even Obama for those who are suspicious of the CIA, for whom he once worked.
Thus I don't know if the grubby things Bloomberg has said in the past will undo his ambition to get the nomination, but then when did Bernie Sanders ever run for the Senate as a Socialist? I don't think he ever did, and his past seems to include a lot of years when he was opposed to gun control laws, and if he is a Socialist, where other than on health, are his socialist policies -assuming his health care policy is socialist-?
I can't really see any inspiring politicians in the US, I think the best you might get is someone who is at least a good manager, though there must be room for the candidate who does not inspire but, when elected, grows into the job and becomes better at it as the first term evolves, rather than the present incumbent, who makes it worse by the minute. Apparently he now thinks is he the Chief Law Officer of the USA, which ironically, he probably is, given that William Barr seems to obey him at all times. And this from a man with 'deep religious beliefs' who has deep concerns about the decline of morals in the USA over the last 45 years!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

Apparently he now thinks is he the Chief Law Officer of the USA, which ironically, he probably is, given that William Barr seems to obey him at all times. And this from a man with 'deep religious beliefs' who has deep concerns about the decline of morals in the USA over the last 45 years!

---

His latest round of pardons is quite revealing. Basically, he's pardoning the sorts of corruption and fraud offences that he has been implicated in himself. Evidently, he doesn't think these should really be treated as serious crimes. https://www.vox.com/2020/2/19/211428...ons-corruption

It's quite a different story for the sorts of crimes committed by people who are not white, rich and well-connected. https://www.vox.com/2020/2/19/211441...s-hogan-gidley

Not only is the President above the law, but it seems that his cronies will be as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexisDVyne

Boomerberg is a republican.. and he's more of an oligarch.. :geek:

---

He also doesn't seem to think much of transsexuals - one of many examples where past statements are coming back to haunt him. https://www.vox.com/2020/2/19/211437...trans-comments

After watching this clip I'm thinking having Bloomberg up there is good batting practice to prepare for Trump. I'm not saying they're the same, but many points of comparison.

https://twitter.com/laurenthehough/status/1230315218082959365

The debate was good.. :)

Bernie needs to be more assertive and say something about the media bias..

Warren totally roasted Boomerberg! She flamed him trice and then slowly dragged him over the coals..

It was definitely the best part.. :D

I'm not saying who my candidate would be...given past form, I've got the fekkin anti-midas touch!

But, what's a super delegate, where do they come in to things?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexisDVyne

Bernie needs to be more assertive and say something about the media bias..

---

This is often a strategy for someone who thinks they cannot win. By the time the general election comes around we will be hearing from Trump about how the media is the enemy of the people and is rigged against him for reporting things he doesn't like. I don't think it's useful for candidates to focus on this instead of what they have to offer the country.

Even before the latest revelations about Bloomberg I never really understood the point of him as a candidate. I don't think businessmen are more qualified in any respect to hold office. Running Bloomberg as an alternative to Trump would be an extremely cynical move. He created something that made him billions and has spent his adult life mistreating people. His comments about transgender people are a window into who he is, as are his crude comments to his employees.

While listening to Bernie's angry man routine last night I was struck by how self-righteous he sounds. He seems to think he's the only one who cares about people. I have to say I liked Warren best and I think she does well when she really asserts herself like she did last night. Her policies really are pretty close to Bernie's and she has a more sound grasp of policy than he does.

Last thought is that I know there are probably some good reasons people are not high on Buttigieg but a lot of the comments I've heard about him are farcical, narrative driven attacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

Even before the latest revelations about Bloomberg I never really understood the point of him as a candidate. I don't think businessmen are more qualified in any respect to hold office. Running Bloomberg as an alternative to Trump would be an extremely cynical move. He created something that made him billions and has spent his adult life mistreating people. His comments about transgender people are a window into who he is, as are his crude comments to his employees.

---

I think his only argument is that he might have the best chance of beating Trump, and obviously Biden's poor performance has played right into that argument. I'm sure he genuinely believes that Trump is a danger, but in normal circumstances he would be running for the Republican nomination. I guess he figured there was no point the way the party is now, so his only option was to try to take over the Dems. The more I know about him, the more he starts to look like a saner and less extreme version of Trump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

The more I know about him, the more he starts to look like a saner and less extreme version of Trump.

---

I agree though I think Bloomberg has probably spent his adult life observing at least some rules and social conventions that Trump ignores. The people Trump really wanted to impress in the New York business world know he is a buffoon and vulgarian. He got used to surrounding himself with flatterers and being petty and vindictive when it came to anyone critical of him. My guess is that Bloomberg would have respect for the rules and institutions even if he seems to have none for people he thinks are beneath him.

He does seem genuinely concerned about gun violence and has shown more willingness to accept a fairer system of taxes. I ask myself why Bloomberg wanted to run when he has money to use in furtherance of some socially useful objectives. He must love the flattery that he's the "real billionaire" in the race and he has the antidote to Trumpism. He also is pitching the idea that he will bring things back to normal which given how bad Trump is has its appeal, but I don't think electing him would be all that normal.

A lot of people I know, many of whom are very dedicated to left-wing causes, were way too excited for him to enter the race. It shows people are considering "electability", which I think is natural, but maybe the way to get there is to first understand what it is you want. You can't really get there in a top-down sort of way...

Regardless of appeal, I think Elizabeth Warren is a credible, serious, and dedicated public servant. I don't know how well she does, but I suppose you never do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

I agree though I think Bloomberg has probably spent his adult life observing at least some rules and social conventions that Trump ignores. The people Trump really wanted to impress in the New York business world know he is a buffoon and vulgarian. He got used to surrounding himself with flatterers and being petty and vindictive when it came to anyone critical of him. My guess is that Bloomberg would have respect for the rules and institutions even if he seems to have none for people he thinks are beneath him.

He does seem genuinely concerned about gun violence and has shown more willingness to accept a fairer system of taxes. I ask myself why Bloomberg wanted to run when he has money to use in furtherance of some socially useful objectives. He must love the flattery that he's the "real billionaire" in the race and he has the antidote to Trumpism. He also is pitching the idea that he will bring things back to normal which given how bad Trump is has its appeal, but I don't think electing him would be all that normal.

A lot of people I know, many of whom are very dedicated to left-wing causes, were way too excited for him to enter the race. It shows people are considering "electability", which I think is natural, but maybe the way to get there is to first understand what it is you want. You can't really get there in a top-down sort of way...

Regardless of appeal, I think Elizabeth Warren is a credible, serious, and dedicated public servant. I don't know how well she does, but I suppose you never do.

---

I think before you can understand what it is you want, if you have to remember the history and identity of this country. The United States has always has been and most likely always will be a center/right country. Once you realize that, then you figure out as party what ideas will work at the national level and what your platform is going to be. Then find you find the candidate who you think can run on that platform and who has the best chance to get elected in a general election.

I think that's why many of your friends were excited when Bloomberg entered the race. He leans left on certain issues, but none of his ideas are that far out there as to turn off independent/moderate voters. Which gives him a solid chance to beat Trump in the general election. As I have stated before, that should be the number one goal of the Democratic Party. Because this is their last chance to get him out of office. Also if they lose in November, there could be a good chance its the end of the Democratic Party as we know it.

But having said all that, I think at this point I'm just ready for Bernie Sanders to be nominee and lets just see what happens in November. Maybe the 12 percent of his voters that voted for Trump in 2016 will come back into the fold and be the difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackchubby38

I think before you can understand what it is you want, if you have to remember the history and identity of this country. The United States has always has been and most likely always will be a center/right country. Once you realize that, then you figure out as party what ideas will work at the national level and what your platform is going to be. Then find you find the candidate who you think can run on that platform and who has the best chance to get elected in a general election.

---

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.

Is a third party probable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tovosan

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackchubby38

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

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.

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-?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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-?

---

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! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexisDVyne

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! :D

---

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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-?

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackchubby38

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

https://media.giphy.com/media/efIIIP...cu6M/giphy.gif

Well, crazy bernie is down for the count, the rest are KO's and warren won't endorse bernie because she hates him.

And now the chi-com (possible biowarfare project) corinavirus is out, thanks china.

4 more years!

Four more years of what? Incompetence? Many countries have had their governance exposed by Covid 19, unprepared for a major epidemic. Few from the start denied it, as did the Presidemt of the USA, who unlike most others of his rank also bragged about his abilities even when they were so obviously non- existent.

The existence of national health services in Europe makes co-ordination of the health response easier, notwithstanding funding issues, whereas the absence of such a service in the US means co-ordination is harder, though Pence has claimed there will be a nationwide organisation, the first of its kind and perhaps the foundation of a national health service.

For most of the early stages of the crisis the President was playing golf and blaming Obama, the President who authorised the creation of a unit designed to tackle, and prepare the US for precilsely this kind of epidemic/pandemic, that John Bolton shut down to meet his buddy's commandment 'Everything Obama must go!' Then your President tried to buy exclusive access to a vaccine being developed by a German company, when any vaccine should be, and will be universally available, something the President seems to object to.

But with interest rates close to zero and markets being bailed out to the tune of $500 billion, the useless, incompetent moron you call President is racking up even more debt that must one day be repaid, or trash the banking system, though it will not affect the money he stores offshore.

Blame is easy to make, a vaccine harder. We are all suffering from managerial indifference to the very kind of global pandemic scientists have been warning us about for decades. The last thing we need is a grubby show pony trying to profit from other people's misery, when inside the US there are capable, indeed, inspiring people who will, over time, help us get through this crisis and survive, though the damage caused may be with us for some time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paladin

And now the chi-com (possible biowarfare project) corinavirus is out, thanks china.

4 more years!

---

But I thought it was a hoax spread by the fake media to detract from the glorious achievements of the god-emperor. Didn't that very stable genus say it was no big deal and he had it all under control? Perhaps you should stay in your right-wing bubble, where I'm sure nothing bad can ever penetrate.

Bernie’s toast. This is as it should be. Thank you voters.

Why do so many Sanders supporters claim that he's been cheated, rather than the more obvious explanation that he failed both times to persuade enough people that he would be the best candidate? The polls, which presumably could not be rigged by the DNC, show Biden having a 20% margin over Sanders. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ry-d/national/

And if he couldn't get a majority of Democrat primary voters - presumably more left-leaning than the general electorate - how could he possibly have better chance than Biden to win in November?

I'm not necessarily a huge Biden fan, and I've argued before that we need to aim for more than just restoring the pre-Trump situation, but I don't think these points can be disputed seriously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

Why do so many Sanders supporters claim that he's been cheated, rather than the more obvious explanation that he failed both times to persuade enough people that he would be the best candidate? The polls, which presumably could not be rigged by the DNC, show Biden having a 20% margin over Sanders. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ry-d/national/

And if he couldn't get a majority of Democrat primary voters - presumably more left-leaning than the general electorate - how could he possibly have better chance than Biden to win in November?

I'm not necessarily a huge Biden fan, and I've argued before that we need to aim for more than just restoring the pre-Trump situation, but I don't think these points can be disputed seriously.

---

Because I think a majority of Sanders supporters have this sense of entitlement. It seems to fall in line with a lot of the issues they believe in. Free college education, Medicare for All*, prisoners being able to vote, etc.

It also doesn't help when Sanders said as of a couple of weeks ago that the Democratic establishment was fixing things for Biden to win the Nomination.

*- Let me clear about something. I believe that healthcare is an universal right. How we go about paying for it, is where I differ from Sanders supporters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackchubby38

Because I think a majority of Sanders supporters have this sense of entitlement. It seems to fall in line with a lot of the issues they believe in. Free college education, Medicare for All*, prisoners being able to vote, etc.

---

I think it might be more to do with many Sanders supporters having a cult-like mentality, just like Trump's supporters. If you believe your candidate is the chosen one, then if he doesn't win it must be due to a nefarious plot. Elizabeth Warren had similar policy positions but her supporters don't seem to have the same mentality.

The worry is that many of them will not turn out to vote, either out of spite or because they think 4 more years of chaos under Trump will better serve their cause in future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

I think it might be more to do with many Sanders supporters having a cult-like mentality, just like Trump's supporters. If you believe your candidate is the chosen one, then if he doesn't win it must be due to a nefarious plot. Elizabeth Warren had similar policy positions but her supporters don't seem to have the same mentality.

The worry is that many of them will not turn out to vote, either out of spite or because they think 4 more years of chaos under Trump will better serve their cause in future.

---

You might right be about the cult-like mentality. If you're on Twitter, check out #DearBernie.

Can the Party Conventions, and indeed, the General Election be postponed, and should they be?