US Politics XIX: Just an Echo Chamber Living In Your Heads - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-06-2020, 12:37 PM   #41
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 63,613
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
Sorry, but these polls don't mean much at this point. Sure, before Trump blankets the airwaves with every lie and smear about sanders, and opening up investigations into him or his wife. Sure, hypothetically in the future voters say they like sanders more than trump in FL. I'm sure that was the case in 2016 as well.

Trump as we know is not your usual candidate. I just think any state that is close, is advantage Trump for pretty much anyone, but more so for some.
Stop.

They do.

Your better argument would be that Biden's numbers are better, not that they don't matter.
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 12:39 PM   #42
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 63,613
Local Time: 11:11 AM
This press conference is the saddest shit ever
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 12:52 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
This press conference is the saddest shit ever
Circle jerk of old white guys.
womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 01:00 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 4,786
Local Time: 04:11 PM
When can we expect the show trials of Mittens, Schiff, Hunter, Hillary....Bolton

You know he wants to go after them, and with Barr being top cop, what's to really stop him? Not saying these "enemies" of Trump will be prosecuted, but the perception would be enough to stop anyone from going against him moving forward.
BEAL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 01:09 PM   #45
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 4,786
Local Time: 04:11 PM
US Politics XIX: Just an Echo Chamber Living In Your Heads

https://twitter.com/yahoonews/status...072459778?s=21

Weird how fast they complied with the GOP....
BEAL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 01:19 PM   #46
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Stop.

They do.

Your better argument would be that Biden's numbers are better, not that they don't matter.
I'm not saying they don't matter at all. It gives a good baseline. But go back and look at the polls from 2016. Hillary dropped pretty significantly in swing state polling from the summer to the fall. It's just the nature of these polls, that a candidate is going to poll higher before they have direct opposition hitting them every day. It's not personal to Bernie, it would be any candidate.


Yes, Biden's numbers are better in the swing states, which was the point of my first post about finding a path to victory. Biden's is easy and numerous, and the question with him would not be how can he scrape out a win, but how much would he win by.

I don't think that Sanders sitting at plus 1 in WI and NC and tied in FL bodes well at this point. I think that equates to a lean Trump by the time the fall rolls around. And without those three states, it lights out.
And here's the real kicker. If Bernie wins MI, PA and gets all of the Maine delegates, instead of a split like 2016 - the result is a 269 to 269 tie.

Can you imagine the hysteria that would come at that point.
womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 02:54 PM   #47
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 17,475
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
Ia path to victory. Biden's is easy and numerous
He can't even get people to show up for him in the primaries, his campaign is in shambles, he is well on his way to running out of $ and he's basically been replaced by a Mayor to a town of 100K people. Mayor Pete is a massive problem for Biden all the way until South Carolina, by which point the polls might be totally unpredictable.

To say nothing of the looming billionaire come Super Tuesday.

I can see Bernie and Warren keeping their numbers basically steady, unless one drops out and the other one takes over.

The "moderate" part of the primary is pretty unpredictable, with the exception of Klobuchar who will bounce out of the race fairly soon.
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 03:21 PM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
He can't even get people to show up for him in the primaries, his campaign is in shambles, he is well on his way to running out of $ and he's basically been replaced by a Mayor to a town of 100K people. Mayor Pete is a massive problem for Biden all the way until South Carolina, by which point the polls might be totally unpredictable.

To say nothing of the looming billionaire come Super Tuesday.

I can see Bernie and Warren keeping their numbers basically steady, unless one drops out and the other one takes over.

The "moderate" part of the primary is pretty unpredictable, with the exception of Klobuchar who will bounce out of the race fairly soon.

No argument there. I'm just going over the map for anyone that is still running over 5%. I've said numerous times that Joe is on his way out from the looks of things. I mean he could shock everyone and get 2nd in NH, which might let him stumble to a strong second in NV, and possible/likely win in SC. I think the media freak out over Biden's low finish in Iowa is skewing people's opinion a bit.

Pete is a problem for Biden in Iowa and NH. I'm not so sure that NV and SC will be kind.
Then what will you have? Possibly Sanders winning 2 or 3,and a couple in 2nd.
Pete winning 1 (yes I'm giving both he and sanders the Iowa win) finishing 2nd in one, and 3rd or 4th in two. Then Biden finishing 4th in one, maybe 2nd or 3rd in one, maybe 2nd in another and winning 1.

That would put Sanders as the frontrunner, and Pete and Biden at equal footing going into super tuesday. This is where Pete will most likely have the money advantage, but Biden is still going to win states like Alabama, Georgia, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Tennessee, North Carolina and Texas. That would give him a huge chunk of delegates. I think this is where Pete is gonna implode. Sanders is gonna clean up the rest, and I don't see Pete being able to do much but finish second or third in any of these states.

I agree Biden may not make it. If he finishes 3rd or 4th in NH, 3rd in NV and anything but first in SC. I think he will drop out. But writing him off after 1 caucus is a little premature.
womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 03:26 PM   #49
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 17,475
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
That would put Sanders as the frontrunner, and Pete and Biden at equal footing going into super tuesday. This is where Pete will most likely have the money advantage, but Biden is still going to win states like Alabama, Georgia, Massachusetts, Oklahoma, Tennessee, North Carolina and Texas. That would give him a huge chunk of delegates. I think this is where Pete is gonna implode. Sanders is gonna clean up the rest, and I don't see Pete being able to do much but finish second or third in any of these states.

I agree Biden may not make it. If he finishes 3rd or 4th in NH, 3rd in NV and anything but first in SC. I think he will drop out. But writing him off after 1 caucus is a little premature.
Bloomberg is on the ballot on Super Tuesday with unlimited funds, which will affect both Pete and Biden.

To be fair, I'm not writing Biden off after 1 caucus. I've been writing him off before he declared he was running.
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 03:26 PM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
He can't even get people to show up for him in the primaries, his campaign is in shambles, he is well on his way to running out of $ and he's basically been replaced by a Mayor to a town of 100K people. Mayor Pete is a massive problem for Biden all the way until South Carolina, by which point the polls might be totally unpredictable.

To say nothing of the looming billionaire come Super Tuesday.

I can see Bernie and Warren keeping their numbers basically steady, unless one drops out and the other one takes over.

The "moderate" part of the primary is pretty unpredictable, with the exception of Klobuchar who will bounce out of the race fairly soon.
Sorry, I didn't address your mention of Bloomberg. Yeah. Man, that is gonna be a problem for both Pete and Biden. It could be a total game changer, and it might not. I can't even speculate on what effect it will have at this point.
womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 03:27 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Bloomberg is on the ballot on Super Tuesday with unlimited funds, which will affect both Pete and Biden.

To be fair, I'm not writing Biden off after 1 caucus. I've been writing him off before he declared he was running.
LMAO!! I admire your consistency!
womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 04:38 PM   #52
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 32,038
Local Time: 11:11 AM
so ... came across two interesting articles, very point-counterpoint.

on one hand, the panic button:

Quote:
The liberal conundrum begins with Joe Biden. The former vice-president led national polls until very recently, and has been the most plausible mainstream liberal candidate. At the same time, doubts about his ability to handle the rigors of the campaign at an advanced age have caused the Democratic Party to withhold the institutional support it gave Hillary Clinton. Yet his name was big enough to preclude a younger, more vigorous Democrat from emerging in the ideological space he occupied. Beto O’Rourke, Cory Booker, and Kamala Harris all tried and failed to run as ideological heirs of Barack Obama, because Obama’s actual partner was still there.

Yet Biden underperformed in Iowa, and his campaign appears to be deflating, at least momentarily. So what to do?

One strategy would be to rally around him, on the grounds that no other candidate has or will have his name recognition and ties to black voters. The other strategy is to hope his campaign collapses as quickly as possible, so that another contender can emerge. (More about them below.) At the moment it is not clear which strategy makes sense. And in the absence of an effective party to coordinate, the most likely scenario is a combination of the two: Some Democrats back Biden, others defect, and others wait to see what happens. That would be the worst possible outcome: a long, slow, painful death that prevents another liberal from taking his place and allows Sanders to gain unstoppable momentum.

[...]

To be sure, if Bloomberg is the last Democrat standing against Sanders, he may well attract substantial support from Democratic elected officials and put up a strong fight. Still, he would face enormous opposition from the left. This is, after all, a billionaire who endorsed George W. Bush in 2004. And while the left has previously whipped itself into an angry frenzy against, successively, O’Rourke, Biden, Harris, and Buttigieg, the rage against Bloomberg would reach a new level.

At that point, the victory scenario would involve a long, bloody struggle all the way to the convention, with the Sanders movement claiming at every step of the way that the party is rigging the race against them, culminating in a convention where his enraged supporters will again try to shout down the proceedings. This is probably the best-case scenario for liberals at this point. It seems more probable that Sanders crushes the field and brings his historically unique suite of liabilities to the ticket.

At the moment, the party is melting down over a vote-reporting fiasco in Iowa. In time, we liberals may look back at this moment as a high point.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020....html#comments


and then there's this (small excerpt from a much longer article) which I think has been brought up in here before:

Quote:
“In the polarized era, the outcome isn’t really about the candidates. What matters is what percentage of the electorate is Republican and Republican leaners, and what percentage is Democratic and Democratic leaners, and how they get activated,” she said.

Accordingly, she believed that whom the Democrats nominated didn’t matter much, and while the rest of the country focused on the districts where Hillary Clinton defeated Trump, she thought those were already mostly in the bag, and so focused instead on the 20 or so districts where Trump performed worse than Mitt Romney had in 2012. Those were places with latent Democratic possibility, and had the national party recognized it earlier, they could have flipped even more seats.

[...]

But still, the results bore out her theory: For Democrats to win, they need to fire up Democratic-minded voters. The Blue Dogs who tried to narrow the difference between themselves and Trump did worse, overall, than the Stacey Abramses and Beto O’Rourkes, whose progressive ideas and inspirational campaigns drove turnout in their own parties and brought them to the cusp of victory.

[...]

But the electorate that elected Donald Trump in 2016 and the electorate that gave Democrats control of the House in 2018 might as well have been from two different countries, Bitecofer says. The first was whiter, had less college education and lived in more rural parts of the country than the second, which was more diverse, better educated and more urban than its counterpart from two years prior. That change had nothing to do with Democrats luring swing voters with savvy messaging, and everything to do with a bunch of people, who were appalled by the president, showing up at the polls, wanting to make their feelings known.

Once you know the shape of the electorate, she argues, you can pretty much tell how that electorate is going to vote. And the shape of the electorate in 2018, and 2020, for that matter, was determined on the night of November 8, 2016. The new electorate, as she forecasts it, is made up mostly of people who want a president named anything but Donald Trump, competing with another group that fears ruin should anyone but Donald Trump be president.

And in a view that goes against years of accepted political wisdom that says the choice of a running mate doesn’t much matter, the key she says, to a 2020 Democratic victory will lie less in who is at the top of the ticket than in who gets chosen as veep. A good ticket-mate would be a person of color like Stacey Abrams or Julián Castro, she suggests, someone who can further ignite Democratic partisans who might otherwise stay home. The reason Trump won in 2016 was not, she says, because of a bunch of disaffected blue-collar former Democrats in the Midwest; it is because a combination of Jill Stein, Gary Johnson and Evan McMullin pulled away more than 6 percent of voters in a state like Michigan. These were anti-Hillary voters, yes—but they were anti-Trump voters especially, and they are likely to come to the Democratic fold this time around if they’re given a reason.

[...]

Unlike forecasters like FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver, who believe that candidates seen as too ideologically extreme pay a political cost, Bitecofer doesn’t see much of a downside to a candidate like Bernie Sanders. But she doesn’t see much of an upside either, since ideology isn’t as big a motivator as identity, and since Sanders did not in fact bring hordes of new voters to the polls in 2016. (Overall turnout in the 2016 primaries was down compared with 2008, when Barack Obama led a surge in the youth vote. In 2016, Sanders just did remarkably well among the young as Clinton tanked.) There is some risk to nominating Joe Biden, who could be seen as a candidate of the status quo against a disrupter like Trump, but either way, the key will be to do their version of what Trump does to them every day: make the prospect of four more years of Republican rule seem like a threat to the Republic, one that could risk everything Democratic-leaning voters hold dear.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...ebrv3ueemHI8uw
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 09:13 PM   #53
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 63,613
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Pete won Iowa by a whisker (unless you partake in Bernie tin foil Twitter).
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 09:19 PM   #54
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 15,535
Local Time: 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Pete won Iowa by a whisker (unless you partake in Bernie tin foil Twitter).


Genuinely how are you going to make such a certain statement when there’s reports everywhere that there are inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the results?

Furthermore, “winning” in this case is dumb as fuck. They ended up with the same delegates and Sanders had significantly more voters, and Pete had a whisker more state delegate things because caucuses.

Sure, if those results hold, Pete won, but it seems like Bernie walks away victoriously here.
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 09:55 PM   #55
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 63,613
Local Time: 11:11 AM
When Perez called for recanvassing before the final vote, Bernie Twitter went nuts saying it's rigged because the DNC knows Bernie is going to win the most delegates.

When the final vote came in and Pete had a slight and fairly insignificant delegate lead, Bernie Twitter went nuts about how it's impossible for Pete to win.

If the recanvassing shows Pete won again? Bernie Twitter won't believe it.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 09:57 PM   #56
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 17,475
Local Time: 11:11 AM
I don't even think it matters anymore. Iowa ruined it for (whoever is) the winner by taking away their opportunity to give a massive speech in prime time and ride the wave to NH.

Way to go, Iowa.
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 09:58 PM   #57
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 15,535
Local Time: 11:11 AM
You’re buying into media so freaking much. It’s ridiculous. Take a step back and look at his campaign, not some fucking people on Twitter. Your twitter knows you just like the rest of your modern internet profiles. You’re being a sucker for that shit. For every stupid thing you hear from some Bernie twitterites, the same stupidity exists for every single campaign on both sides of the isles, and it happens directly proportional to the amount of followers they have.
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 10:09 PM   #58
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 63,613
Local Time: 11:11 AM
That must be it
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 10:10 PM   #59
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Pete won Iowa by a whisker (unless you partake in Bernie tin foil Twitter).
But... but... Bernie said that he won a "decisive victory"?!?!?
He even posted on social media - BERNIE WINS IOWA!

I unfortunately commented on an IG post. Saying that Bernie and Pete need to accept whatever the result is and move on since they are splitting the delegates anyway.
And blaming the DNC every time Bernie doesn't win something is not helpful.

Oh boy. LOL. All the reasons I stopped supporting Bernie in 2016 and quit Twitter all together came rushing back. I woke up to 38 alerts on my phone.

Fuck off Russian bot,
Looks like we have a DNC mole,
The DNC and the oligarchy took a shot at Bernie, but he still won.
THE DNC AND ESTABLISHMENT DEMS ARE THE ONES CAUSING DIVISION!!!!
Pete is an investor in the company that created the App and this has been in the works for a long time.
The Clinton's started this app company and they're working with Pete to bring Bernie down!
You're stone cold stupid, You have no idea what goes on behind the scenes to rig all this.
You must be #PeteTheCheat's boyfriend
Pete can't win. Did you see the video of a voter finding out he's gay and he switched to Bernie on the spot
We're much more likely to have a Jew in the White House than a gay guy
Mayor Cheat will never win!!



Uuuuuuhhhh.. Yeah. That was my experience. And take note that these comments were posted with these people under the assumption that Bernie won! It's so Trump like. Even if they win, if the win wasn't big enough, it was rigged. Just crazy shit.
But yet I get blasted here anytime I say anything bad about Bernie supporters .
womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 10:13 PM   #60
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 5,135
Local Time: 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
You’re buying into media so freaking much. It’s ridiculous. Take a step back and look at his campaign, not some fucking people on Twitter. Your twitter knows you just like the rest of your modern internet profiles. You’re being a sucker for that shit. For every stupid thing you hear from some Bernie twitterites, the same stupidity exists for every single campaign on both sides of the isles, and it happens directly proportional to the amount of followers they have.
Just an FYI. That's completely false.
__________________

womanfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×