2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part III - Page 91

Skeptic Ginger · 4th March 2020, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

While Elizabeth Warren just gets smarter and prettier with each passing day!

Maybe its Maybelline or a painting in the attic.

Haven't seen any evidence of brain deterioration. Have you?

Sideroxylon · 4th March 2020, 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Haven't seen any evidence of brain deterioration. Have you?

None at all. Was a reaction to your smear on Sanders. Will you be getting behind the progressive front runner or the establishment choice?

Brainster · 5th March 2020, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

You have a link to that?

My bad, here's the link.

Aridas · 5th March 2020, 12:37 AM

Mmm. This ended up longer than I like, but... I also don't feel like responding to all these individually.

Originally Posted by Cabbage

Looks to me like he's trying to build a coalition of voters.

While generally ignoring those that they've chosen to represent them.

Originally Posted by Cabbage

And I'm still pointing out that McConnell and the GOP have engaged in an unprecedented level of obstructionism. You can't just hand wave that away and pretend it's Sanders fault for overcoming that obstruction; place the blame where it clearly lies.

Sure. McConnell's to blame for a lot. With that said, though, going by his record, Sanders frequently doesn't even really try to make things happen in the first place. Rather, it seems more like he frequently gives up preemptively, without even seriously trying to actually make things happen. Compare this to Warren, who has apparently got about a dozen bills passed recently, despite McConnell and the general obstructionism of the Republicans.

Originally Posted by Cabbage

I continue to claim he has.

Personally, I agree with you that Sanders has created a nationwide coalition of voters. With that said, there's not much evidence that it's strong enough to win many legislature spots to directly help him enact his agenda or usable enough to pressure current lawmakers into supporting his agenda... and that somewhat gets to one of the hearts of how unrealistic it is when he claims that his approach to getting things done will be to get the constituents of legislators to effectively force the legislators to give in.

Originally Posted by Cabbage

...and that's not Bernie's fault.

It... sorta is, pretty much by definition? He's chosen a particular tactic to accomplish things and he's failed to reach success with it over and over. That IS his responsibility, for better or worse.

Originally Posted by xjx388

That implies he cheated or something.

Not necessarily. In games, for example, there are frequently bugs or exploits that can be abused to effectively break the system/designed gameplay. Is that cheating? Yes and no, depending on what considerations you're taking into account. Devs frequently act to fix those bugs/exploits, either way. With that said, I'm very much in agreement with Cabbage that McConnell's abusing the system in much the same sense as that.

Originally Posted by SezMe

I've got to step in at this point. The constitution says that the President shall have Power, .... and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the Supreme Court, McConnell's Senate did not do this. Thus, I would argue what he did was unconstitutional. If not, then it was at the very least cheating. That is not simply competing.

It was certainly a destructive abuse of the rules, at very least, rather, and is not even remotely a good faith move.

Originally Posted by theprestige

Which brings us around to "is altruism even real"?

I hold that the only people who do their stern duty do so either because doing so gratifies them in some way, or they've been given a value proposition where doing their duty is the most profitable compromise.

Very few people say to themselves, "I hate doing this, and I'd rather have the consequences of not doing it, but I'm going to do it anyway." Even people who engage in self-harm do so because they think or feel that the overall trade-off will be gratifying in some way.

There's two things here to note. First, stern duty =/= altruism. You're wrong to conflate them.

Second, rather than starting with the question of whether altruism even real, it's likely better to first specifically define what is supposed to constitute altruism and compare that to the actual usage of such. I'm fairly sure that you can easily define it out of existence by requiring a philosophical stance that it can't benefit the giver in any way, shape, or form - while completely ignoring that, in practice, that's pretty much empty semantics, because it's almost never actually used that way in the first place.

Originally Posted by Distracted1

Not a flaw in this election when one considers why Biden has a better shot than Sanders.

When Sanders' charisma is getting the Liberals in CA, and TX all happy (without doing a damn thing that will change the outcome of the election WRT those two States) it is also getting the moderates and fence-sitting conservatives in MI, PA, and WI riled up in the opposite direction, possibly costing us those States n the General- and by extension, the General itself.

Biden camp - For all his many flaws, he can get moderates to vote for liberal policies.
Sanders camp - Revolution! Let's take down the Democratic party and make it do what we want it to!

At a very fundamental level, Biden's campaign is more uniting than Sanders. Worse than Warren, certainly, but more than Sanders. Biden's wins on Super Tuesday are very likely largely because of backlash to how Sander is handling things. Sanders is running a great campaign, but not necessarily so great for what he's actually running for, in other words.

Originally Posted by dudalb

SO Charisma is the only thing that counts in elections?

It does count for a lot, to be fair.

Originally Posted by dudalb

I think that Biden probably has a few more delegates then the official Super Tuesday results will show; I think he has most of Mayor Pete and Klobucher's delagates pretty much in his pocket.

I've read that as part of their endorsement of Biden, they functionally ceded their delegates to him? I think that there's probably still the chance to change that, but...

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

The thing about Joe's recent "gaffes" is that they're different than they used to be. Earlier in his career he'd just lie or say something stupid or offensive. But now he's regularly losing his train of thought and getting confused. These are signs of a serious cognitive decline. And no other candidate in the race, including Trump and Sanders, is showing anything like this sort of decline. It's sad, really.

Which would mean that we have to choose between two people who are suffering from significant cognitive decline if Biden wins. Of course, that may be giving too much credit to how great Trump's cognitive state ever was.

Still, that it looks like they're declining is just one of the numerous reasons that I don't really want either Biden or Trump.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Well, yes. Trump is much the same as he always was. Biden isn't what he used to be. You don't have to like Trump or hate Biden to be able to see that.

I disagree. It is again true that Trump was never not an idiot in the first place, so it doesn't show quite as blatantly, though.

Originally Posted by carlitos

Trump is a classic case study for the phenomenon of psychological projection. He certainly can and does attack people for things that he himself is weak on. There was ammo last time too; it just didn't affect enough voters in a couple of swing states.

Yeah... there's also the open question of how much of it's actually projection versus a case of a thief loudly yelling that the thief's victim is actually the thief. Either way, Trump being weak on something frequently wouldn't even come into the equation when what the listener craves is validation and is plenty happy to accept it when it comes from putting others down (even falsely).

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Surely you are kidding me with this. Now that Biden is back in the limelight, the political prosecution of Hunter Biden will resume without a lost step.

Has. Within hours of Biden's win, again leaving no doubt at all that it's politically motivated and nothing else.

Originally Posted by dudalb

Re Biden versus Trump in the gaffe department:
Biden puts his foot in his mouth on occasion. Trump keeps it there 24/7.

Mmm. Here's a video for you from the Lincoln Project.

Originally Posted by dudalb

yeah, replacing the Market with a Command economy worked so damn well in the Soviet Union.
I think if Bernie had been elected President you would have been bitterly disspaointed because he seems to be nowhere as far to the left as you are.

Mmm. You're skipping all the way to a Command economy, despite that having nearly no relation to what even Democratic Socialism actually is pushing for and the comment you quoted not even remotely supporting a Command Economy?

Originally Posted by dudalb

I note a couple of Bernie's overseas Bros here seem never to have really grasped some facts about American voters and the American Political system.

That's true across the spectrum, honestly. I've had a couple Brit conservatives, for example, trying to tell me that the Trump shutdown because he was having a temper tantrum over not getting his wall would easily be solvable if Democrats would say that they're willing to give Trump his wall in return for M4A. Therefore, the Democrats were at fault at least as much as Trump.

It was genuinely shocking to them, for example, when I pointed out that Democrats are a big tent party and a lot of Democrats likely wouldn't support M4A in the first place for a few reasons.

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

You make it sound like it was a resounding defeat for Bernie.

This is very much a close, contested race.

Sure. The bang for the buck should probably be taken into account, too, though. Biden won states that he didn't campaign in or barely campaigned in.

Originally Posted by tyr_13

Oof, same. Except my state's is in April I think.

I've never had a candidate I actually agreed with both policy and temperament wise as her. It was great to be able to actually see not only what policies she supported, but why, and what it would take for her to change. On top of that, she was willing to be pragmatic. Her answer on if she would have signed the ACA if it were her choice at the time seriously impressed me.

As is mine. If Warren drops out, there's honestly a decent chance I just won't vote for a Democratic Presidential candidate at all in the primary and just vote blue in the general, either way. Neither Biden nor Bernie is particularly appealing to me, albeit for very different reasons, and there isn't a strong candidate to vote against.

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy

The voters too. That's been her running tragedy this election: Warren was everyone's first pick, but everyone felt they needed to support someone else to make sure some third group voted against Trump.

A strong plurality, at least. Either way, IIRC Warren's "surge" pretty much was ended when CNN pulled that "Warren says Bernie said" crap that was exploded sooooo far out of proportion to the actual content, accompanied with all that #Warrenisasnake BS.

Sideroxylon · 5th March 2020, 02:47 AM

Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden.

The Great Zaganza · 5th March 2020, 02:55 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden.

That might be ideal, but I wonder if the chemistry can work.

Aridas · 5th March 2020, 02:57 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden.

angrysoba · 5th March 2020, 03:21 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden.

That might have been the idea. But I think Warren staying in the race is demonstrating her limited appeal.

Robin · 5th March 2020, 03:54 AM

I can't see how Warren is taking votes from Sanders.

I would have thought she was closer to Biden, so would take votes from him.

Also, would Biden really want a VP who is much smarter than him?

Sideroxylon · 5th March 2020, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by Robin

I can't see how Warren is taking votes from Sanders.

I would have thought she was closer to Biden, so would take votes from him.

Also, would Biden really want a VP who is much smarter than him?

Is that a guess or are you going by polls on this question?

Again and again Sanders supporters have been told that Warren is just a younger and brighter progressive choice. Some feminists were adding that the only reason for choosing Sanders is sexism.

On the having a smarter VP is Biden a narcissist/sexist who couldn’t handle having a smarter woman in that position?

Sideroxylon · 5th March 2020, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

That might have been the idea. But I think Warren staying in the race is demonstrating her limited appeal.

The demonstrated limited appeal plus staying in the race might be well explained by being happy to take away from Sanders’ count.

Puppycow · 5th March 2020, 04:48 AM

Personally I think she's about to drop out. Before the weekend probably. She's just coming to terms with it.

Sideroxylon · 5th March 2020, 04:51 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Personally I think she's about to drop out. Before the weekend probably. She's just coming to terms with it.

I hope you are right and she endorses Sanders.

Puppycow · 5th March 2020, 05:01 AM

There's really no reason for her to stay in other than pride or stubbornness at this point. All the other also-rans have seen the writing on the wall and dropped out. Unless you count fringe candidates. There's nothing more to be gained by staying in. Unless to spite Bernie.

SuburbanTurkey · 5th March 2020, 05:11 AM

Deleted, Double post

SuburbanTurkey · 5th March 2020, 05:14 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

There's really no reason for her to stay in other than pride or stubbornness at this point. All the other also-rans have seen the writing on the wall and dropped out. Unless you count fringe candidates. There's nothing more to be gained by staying in. Unless to spite Bernie.

Her staying in the race only damages the party and makes the prospects of beating Trump worse.

A brokered convention is the scenario that maximizes inter-party enmity. Warren dropping out increases the likelihood that either Biden or Bernie reaches the majority threshold and avoids the brokered nightmare.

I don't say this as a Bernie partisan. It's not clear where her supporters would go, and she could probably sway some of her supporters by endorsing. The way she has run her campaign, I wouldn't be surprised if she endorsed Biden.

A Biden majority win is a much, much better outcome than a Biden plurality and brokered convention win.

Belz... · 5th March 2020, 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

As stupid and selfish among the boomers as I thought though. Will laugh mercilessly if you re-elect Trump.

What do you even mean by "boomer"? Someone who doesn't agree with you?

Belz... · 5th March 2020, 05:36 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Some people think Trump is declining. I can only say he appears worse than he was several years ago.

It might also be a feedback loop. He gets adulation by saying nonsense and being a dick, and he's internalised that by becoming more nonsensical and more offensive. It doesn't help.

Sideroxylon · 5th March 2020, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by Belz...

What do you even mean by "boomer"? Someone who doesn't agree with you?

Yes, that’s right.

Belz... · 5th March 2020, 05:50 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

Yes, that’s right.

I would've prefered a serious answer to sarcasm, but I shouldn't expect more, I guess.

Surely you don't mean "baby boomer", as the label doesn't match your use of it. So what is it?

d4m10n · 5th March 2020, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

Will you be getting behind the progressive front runner or the ~~establishment choice~~ popular vote leader?

FTFY

SuburbanTurkey · 5th March 2020, 06:05 AM

I really don't understand the tone shift that has happened here. Biden has a tiny lead over Bernie. It's still very much a contested election.

Biden has 28% of the delegates needed for a majority win

Bernie has 25%.

Biden is the frontrunner of a very close race in which lots of states are still left.

Distracted1 · 5th March 2020, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

That might have been the idea. But I think Warren staying in the race is demonstrating her limited appeal.

There is a debate on the 15th. in AZ.
You see her appeal falling after sharing the debate stage with the two guys from the balcony on the muppets?

I hope she stays in at least till after that debate. And preferably all the way to the end.

Distracted1 · 5th March 2020, 06:08 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

There's really no reason for her to stay in other than pride or stubbornness at this point. All the other also-rans have seen the writing on the wall and dropped out. Unless you count fringe candidates. There's nothing more to be gained by staying in. Unless to spite Bernie.

There are still two months and more than half the delegates to go.

If her financing does not dry up, she is going to start looking better and better by comparison to the frontrunners.

SuburbanTurkey · 5th March 2020, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

There is a debate on the 15th. in AZ.
You see her appeal falling after sharing the debate stage with the two guys from the balcony on the muppets?

I hope she stays in at least till after that debate. And preferably all the way to the end.

What does the path to victory look like for her? Winning a majority is out unless you honestly expect Warren to win states at like 60% or more.

Edit: Quick calculation comes up with Warren needing to win 70% of all remaining pledged delegates to get a majority. Nobody thinks this is going to happen, right?

Do you think that Warren can win a majority?

The only reasonable path to victory for her is a contested convention. Given the coalescing of the rest of the party around Biden, I find it very hard to imagine that they would turn it over to Warren who would probably be coming in a distant third.

TragicMonkey · 5th March 2020, 06:14 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

There are still two months and more than half the delegates to go.

If her financing does not dry up, she is going to start looking better and better by comparison to the frontrunners.

Those who don't like Sanders and those who don't like Biden can compromise by supporting Warren instead. Aren't both groups constantly yammering on about the greatness and necessity of compromise? Here's their opportunity to actually do it. Unless they are simply dirty hypocrites and only value compromise when they're trying to persuade others to give in. Surely not.

Belz... · 5th March 2020, 06:16 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Those who don't like Sanders and those who don't like Biden can compromise by supporting Warren instead. Aren't both groups constantly yammering on about the greatness and necessity of compromise?

Hey, that's me!!

d4m10n · 5th March 2020, 06:23 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

I really don't understand the tone shift that has happened here. Biden has a tiny lead over Bernie. It's still very much a contested election.

Very much so. We'll have a better idea what the new two-man race dynamic looks like next Wednesday.

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Do you think that Warren can win a majority?

She may win enough to be the key powerbroker going in to Milwaukee, assuming no one makes it to 1,991.

Distracted1 · 5th March 2020, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Those who don't like Sanders and those who don't like Biden can compromise by supporting Warren instead. Aren't both groups constantly yammering on about the greatness and necessity of compromise? Here's their opportunity to actually do it. Unless they are simply dirty hypocrites and only value compromise when they're trying to persuade others to give in. Surely not.

I think she mitigates a good deal of the Sanders' supporters bitterness. And provides all the "anyone but Sanders" with a better choice than the walking corpse that Biden seems to be.

Distracted1 · 5th March 2020, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

What does the path to victory look like for her? Winning a majority is out unless you honestly expect Warren to win states at like 60% or more.

Edit: Quick calculation comes up with Warren needing to win 70% of all remaining pledged delegates to get a majority. Nobody thinks this is going to happen, right?

Do you think that Warren can win a majority?

The only reasonable path to victory for her is a contested convention. Given the coalescing of the rest of the party around Biden, I find it very hard to imagine that they would turn it over to Warren who would probably be coming in a distant third.

Brokered convention.
What the Convention is supposed to be in the first place.

SuburbanTurkey · 5th March 2020, 06:57 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

Brokered convention.
What the Convention is supposed to be in the first place.

What exactly does that look like, in your mind? Warren comes in with enough delegates to deny both Bernie and Biden a majority win, then somehow she emerges as the candidate?

The entire party apparatus is unified in supporting Biden. In what world are the superdelegates going to prefer Warren with like 10-15% of pledged delegates over Biden with like 35-45%?

Best case scenario for Warren is she extracts a VP or cabinet position in exchange for her delegates. Doesn't seem like a good deal as it necessitates sending the party into chaotic infighting for a brokered convention.

Cabbage · 5th March 2020, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Aridas

Mmm. This ended up longer than I like, but... I also don't feel like responding to all these individually.

While generally ignoring those that they've chosen to represent them.

Sure. McConnell's to blame for a lot. With that said, though, going by his record, Sanders frequently doesn't even really try to make things happen in the first place. Rather, it seems more like he frequently gives up preemptively, without even seriously trying to actually make things happen. Compare this to Warren, who has apparently got about a dozen bills passed recently, despite McConnell and the general obstructionism of the Republicans.

Personally, I agree with you that Sanders has created a nationwide coalition of voters. With that said, there's not much evidence that it's strong enough to win many legislature spots to directly help him enact his agenda or usable enough to pressure current lawmakers into supporting his agenda... and that somewhat gets to one of the hearts of how unrealistic it is when he claims that his approach to getting things done will be to get the constituents of legislators to effectively force the legislators to give in.

It... sorta is, pretty much by definition? He's chosen a particular tactic to accomplish things and he's failed to reach success with it over and over. That IS his responsibility, for better or worse.

Regarding Bernie not getting anything done: I've seen others on this board complain about Bernie's supporters not realizing that Bernie as president would not be able to accomplish his agenda. What makes them think we are so naive? Every Bernie supporter I have spoken with is well aware he won't be able to push his agenda through as president. And I wouldn't fault him for that, in the face of GOP obstructionism.

No, we are supporting him for the purpose of pushing the federal govt, however so slightly or not, to the left, after such dramatic swings to the right over the past few decades. And let me preemptively point out to anyone deciding to ask me: Wouldn't it be better to support a progressive left candidate who can get things done?

1. I'm not sure that's possible in the current political climate.

2. You vote for the progressive left candidate you have, not the progressive left candidate you want.

Finally, for anyone who claims Warren is similar but she's accomplished more in the Senate: I'm on the record on this board stating on several occasions that I consider my support between Warren and Sanders a coin flip. I decided several months ago to vote for which ever had the momentum at the time of my state's primary. And that's exactly what I did.

TragicMonkey · 5th March 2020, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

What exactly does that look like, in your mind? Warren comes in with enough delegates to deny both Bernie and Biden a majority win, then somehow she emerges as the candidate?

The entire party apparatus is unified in supporting Biden. In what world are the superdelegates going to prefer Warren with like 10-15% of pledged delegates over Biden with like 35-45%?

Best case scenario for Warren is she extracts a VP or cabinet position in exchange for her delegates. Doesn't seem like a good deal as it necessitates sending the party into chaotic infighting for a brokered convention.

Perhaps she's hoping that either Sanders or Biden will drop dead in the next five days. The odds of that aren't very bad!

JoeMorgue · 5th March 2020, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Perhaps she's hoping that either Sanders or Biden will drop dead in the next five days. The odds of that aren't very bad!

There's a joke that the only job the VP has is to wake up every morning and ask if the President is still alive or not, then go back to bed.

That might have to be updated to hourly check-ins.

Mike! · 5th March 2020, 07:23 AM

E-freaking-gads. It's clear the Missouri primaries are coming up quick, the political ads have all been turned up to eleven. And everyone is evoking Obama like there's no tomorrow. Despite him not endorsing anyone, it seems like he's the star of every ad. I guess it's a good thing at one point or another, Obama had to introduce Warren, Sanders, and Biden to a crowd so they can all now use his introductory remarks as if it's an individual endorsement.

Beelzebuddy · 5th March 2020, 07:26 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

What exactly does that look like, in your mind? Warren comes in with enough delegates to deny both Bernie and Biden a majority win, then somehow she emerges as the candidate?

I think she can use that to shift Biden's policies significantly to the left. Aside from "I have Obama's cell number," Biden doesn't really stand for much. Warren can walk in with a stack of her policy treatises and offer to avoid a brokered convention if he makes them his policy too.

TragicMonkey · 5th March 2020, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by Mike!

E-freaking-gads. It's clear the Missouri primaries are coming up quick, the political ads have all been turned up to eleven. And everyone is evoking Obama like there's no tomorrow. Despite him not endorsing anyone, it seems like he's the star of every ad. I guess it's a good thing at one point or another, Obama had to introduce Warren, Sanders, and Biden to a crowd so they can all now use his introductory remarks as if it's an individual endorsement.

The Bloomberg flyers are still trickling through the mail. Dumpster in my alley was full of them last week.

JoeMorgue · 5th March 2020, 07:29 AM

I still had Bloomberg ads running last night in FL. Guess he had already paid for them or there was no time to redue to advertising schedule or something.

d4m10n · 5th March 2020, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

There's a joke that the only job the VP has is to wake up every morning and ask if the President is still alive or not, then go back to bed.

Mike Pence would likely disagree, having been saddled with the heavy burden of taking the blame for mismanaging the largest public health crisis in my lifetime.

Distracted1 · 5th March 2020, 07:30 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Perhaps she's hoping that either Sanders or Biden will drop dead in the next five days. The odds of that aren't very bad!

I give that only an %18 probability of being a joke.

Perhaps we could convince Trump to participate in a wrestling match with our guy, and whomever survives the ordeal is the president for the next week or so until his own heart gives out.

5th March 2020, 12:14 AM	#3603
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 18,358	Originally Posted by Distracted1 You have a link to that? My bad, here's the link.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

5th March 2020, 12:37 AM	#3604
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: East Coast, US Posts: 7,568	Mmm. This ended up longer than I like, but... I also don't feel like responding to all these individually. Originally Posted by Cabbage Looks to me like he's trying to build a coalition of voters. While generally ignoring those that they've chosen to represent them. Originally Posted by Cabbage And I'm still pointing out that McConnell and the GOP have engaged in an unprecedented level of obstructionism. You can't just hand wave that away and pretend it's Sanders fault for overcoming that obstruction; place the blame where it clearly lies. Sure. McConnell's to blame for a lot. With that said, though, going by his record, Sanders frequently doesn't even really try to make things happen in the first place. Rather, it seems more like he frequently gives up preemptively, without even seriously trying to actually make things happen. Compare this to Warren, who has apparently got about a dozen bills passed recently, despite McConnell and the general obstructionism of the Republicans. Originally Posted by Cabbage I continue to claim he has. Personally, I agree with you that Sanders has created a nationwide coalition of voters. With that said, there's not much evidence that it's strong enough to win many legislature spots to directly help him enact his agenda or usable enough to pressure current lawmakers into supporting his agenda... and that somewhat gets to one of the hearts of how unrealistic it is when he claims that his approach to getting things done will be to get the constituents of legislators to effectively force the legislators to give in. Originally Posted by Cabbage ...and that's not Bernie's fault. It... sorta is, pretty much by definition? He's chosen a particular tactic to accomplish things and he's failed to reach success with it over and over. That IS his responsibility, for better or worse. Originally Posted by xjx388 That implies he cheated or something. Not necessarily. In games, for example, there are frequently bugs or exploits that can be abused to effectively break the system/designed gameplay. Is that cheating? Yes and no, depending on what considerations you're taking into account. Devs frequently act to fix those bugs/exploits, either way. With that said, I'm very much in agreement with Cabbage that McConnell's abusing the system in much the same sense as that. Originally Posted by SezMe I've got to step in at this point. The constitution says that the President shall have Power, .... and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the Supreme Court, McConnell's Senate did not do this. Thus, I would argue what he did was unconstitutional. If not, then it was at the very least cheating. That is not simply competing. It was certainly a destructive abuse of the rules, at very least, rather, and is not even remotely a good faith move. Originally Posted by theprestige Which brings us around to "is altruism even real"? I hold that the only people who do their stern duty do so either because doing so gratifies them in some way, or they've been given a value proposition where doing their duty is the most profitable compromise. Very few people say to themselves, "I hate doing this, and I'd rather have the consequences of not doing it, but I'm going to do it anyway." Even people who engage in self-harm do so because they think or feel that the overall trade-off will be gratifying in some way. There's two things here to note. First, stern duty =/= altruism. You're wrong to conflate them. Second, rather than starting with the question of whether altruism even real, it's likely better to first specifically define what is supposed to constitute altruism and compare that to the actual usage of such. I'm fairly sure that you can easily define it out of existence by requiring a philosophical stance that it can't benefit the giver in any way, shape, or form - while completely ignoring that, in practice, that's pretty much empty semantics, because it's almost never actually used that way in the first place. Originally Posted by Distracted1 Not a flaw in this election when one considers why Biden has a better shot than Sanders. When Sanders' charisma is getting the Liberals in CA, and TX all happy (without doing a damn thing that will change the outcome of the election WRT those two States) it is also getting the moderates and fence-sitting conservatives in MI, PA, and WI riled up in the opposite direction, possibly costing us those States n the General- and by extension, the General itself. Biden camp - For all his many flaws, he can get moderates to vote for liberal policies. Sanders camp - Revolution! Let's take down the Democratic party and make it do what we want it to! At a very fundamental level, Biden's campaign is more uniting than Sanders. Worse than Warren, certainly, but more than Sanders. Biden's wins on Super Tuesday are very likely largely because of backlash to how Sander is handling things. Sanders is running a great campaign, but not necessarily so great for what he's actually running for, in other words. Originally Posted by dudalb SO Charisma is the only thing that counts in elections? It does count for a lot, to be fair. Originally Posted by dudalb I think that Biden probably has a few more delegates then the official Super Tuesday results will show; I think he has most of Mayor Pete and Klobucher's delagates pretty much in his pocket. I've read that as part of their endorsement of Biden, they functionally ceded their delegates to him? I think that there's probably still the chance to change that, but... Originally Posted by Ziggurat The thing about Joe's recent "gaffes" is that they're different than they used to be. Earlier in his career he'd just lie or say something stupid or offensive. But now he's regularly losing his train of thought and getting confused. These are signs of a serious cognitive decline. And no other candidate in the race, including Trump and Sanders, is showing anything like this sort of decline. It's sad, really. Which would mean that we have to choose between two people who are suffering from significant cognitive decline if Biden wins. Of course, that may be giving too much credit to how great Trump's cognitive state ever was. Still, that it looks like they're declining is just one of the numerous reasons that I don't really want either Biden or Trump. Originally Posted by Ziggurat Well, yes. Trump is much the same as he always was. Biden isn't what he used to be. You don't have to like Trump or hate Biden to be able to see that. I disagree. It is again true that Trump was never not an idiot in the first place, so it doesn't show quite as blatantly, though. Originally Posted by carlitos Trump is a classic case study for the phenomenon of psychological projection. He certainly can and does attack people for things that he himself is weak on. There was ammo last time too; it just didn't affect enough voters in a couple of swing states. Yeah... there's also the open question of how much of it's actually projection versus a case of a thief loudly yelling that the thief's victim is actually the thief. Either way, Trump being weak on something frequently wouldn't even come into the equation when what the listener craves is validation and is plenty happy to accept it when it comes from putting others down (even falsely). Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Surely you are kidding me with this. Now that Biden is back in the limelight, the political prosecution of Hunter Biden will resume without a lost step. Has. Within hours of Biden's win, again leaving no doubt at all that it's politically motivated and nothing else. Originally Posted by dudalb Re Biden versus Trump in the gaffe department: Biden puts his foot in his mouth on occasion. Trump keeps it there 24/7. Mmm. Here's a video for you from the Lincoln Project. Originally Posted by dudalb yeah, replacing the Market with a Command economy worked so damn well in the Soviet Union. I think if Bernie had been elected President you would have been bitterly disspaointed because he seems to be nowhere as far to the left as you are. Mmm. You're skipping all the way to a Command economy, despite that having nearly no relation to what even Democratic Socialism actually is pushing for and the comment you quoted not even remotely supporting a Command Economy? Originally Posted by dudalb I note a couple of Bernie's overseas Bros here seem never to have really grasped some facts about American voters and the American Political system. That's true across the spectrum, honestly. I've had a couple Brit conservatives, for example, trying to tell me that the Trump shutdown because he was having a temper tantrum over not getting his wall would easily be solvable if Democrats would say that they're willing to give Trump his wall in return for M4A. Therefore, the Democrats were at fault at least as much as Trump. It was genuinely shocking to them, for example, when I pointed out that Democrats are a big tent party and a lot of Democrats likely wouldn't support M4A in the first place for a few reasons. Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey You make it sound like it was a resounding defeat for Bernie. This is very much a close, contested race. Sure. The bang for the buck should probably be taken into account, too, though. Biden won states that he didn't campaign in or barely campaigned in. Originally Posted by tyr_13 Oof, same. Except my state's is in April I think. I've never had a candidate I actually agreed with both policy and temperament wise as her. It was great to be able to actually see not only what policies she supported, but why, and what it would take for her to change. On top of that, she was willing to be pragmatic. Her answer on if she would have signed the ACA if it were her choice at the time seriously impressed me. As is mine. If Warren drops out, there's honestly a decent chance I just won't vote for a Democratic Presidential candidate at all in the primary and just vote blue in the general, either way. Neither Biden nor Bernie is particularly appealing to me, albeit for very different reasons, and there isn't a strong candidate to vote against. Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy The voters too. That's been her running tragedy this election: Warren was everyone's first pick, but everyone felt they needed to support someone else to make sure some third group voted against Trump. A strong plurality, at least. Either way, IIRC Warren's "surge" pretty much was ended when CNN pulled that "Warren says Bernie said" crap that was exploded sooooo far out of proportion to the actual content, accompanied with all that #Warrenisasnake BS.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon. Last edited by Aridas; 5th March 2020 at 12:44 AM.

5th March 2020, 02:55 AM	#3606
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 14,853	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden. That might be ideal, but I wonder if the chemistry can work.
	__________________ The things that you're liable To read in the Bible It ain't necessarily so

5th March 2020, 02:57 AM	#3607
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: East Coast, US Posts: 7,568	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

5th March 2020, 03:21 AM	#3608
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 29,601	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden. That might have been the idea. But I think Warren staying in the race is demonstrating her limited appeal.
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

4th March 2020, 11:38 PM	#3601
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 87,763	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon While Elizabeth Warren just gets smarter and prettier with each passing day! Maybe its Maybelline or a painting in the attic. Haven't seen any evidence of brain deterioration. Have you?

4th March 2020, 11:55 PM	#3602
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,443	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Haven't seen any evidence of brain deterioration. Have you? None at all. Was a reaction to your smear on Sanders. Will you be getting behind the progressive front runner or the establishment choice?

5th March 2020, 02:47 AM	#3605
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,443	Elizabeth Warren will be VP to Biden. Staying in the race to continue to shaft Sanders’ chances against the sundowning Biden.

5th March 2020, 03:54 AM	#3609
Robin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 12,881	I can't see how Warren is taking votes from Sanders. I would have thought she was closer to Biden, so would take votes from him. Also, would Biden really want a VP who is much smarter than him?
	__________________ The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

5th March 2020, 04:15 AM	#3610
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,443	Originally Posted by Robin I can't see how Warren is taking votes from Sanders. I would have thought she was closer to Biden, so would take votes from him. Also, would Biden really want a VP who is much smarter than him? Is that a guess or are you going by polls on this question? Again and again Sanders supporters have been told that Warren is just a younger and brighter progressive choice. Some feminists were adding that the only reason for choosing Sanders is sexism. On the having a smarter VP is Biden a narcissist/sexist who couldn’t handle having a smarter woman in that position?

5th March 2020, 04:17 AM	#3611
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,443	Originally Posted by angrysoba That might have been the idea. But I think Warren staying in the race is demonstrating her limited appeal. The demonstrated limited appeal plus staying in the race might be well explained by being happy to take away from Sanders’ count.

5th March 2020, 04:48 AM	#3612
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 25,862	Personally I think she's about to drop out. Before the weekend probably. She's just coming to terms with it.
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare

5th March 2020, 04:51 AM	#3613
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,443	Originally Posted by Puppycow Personally I think she's about to drop out. Before the weekend probably. She's just coming to terms with it. I hope you are right and she endorses Sanders.

5th March 2020, 05:01 AM	#3614
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 25,862	There's really no reason for her to stay in other than pride or stubbornness at this point. All the other also-rans have seen the writing on the wall and dropped out. Unless you count fringe candidates. There's nothing more to be gained by staying in. Unless to spite Bernie.
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare

5th March 2020, 05:11 AM	#3615
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,450	Deleted, Double post
	__________________ Gobble gobble Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 5th March 2020 at 05:14 AM.

5th March 2020, 05:14 AM	#3616
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,450	Originally Posted by Puppycow There's really no reason for her to stay in other than pride or stubbornness at this point. All the other also-rans have seen the writing on the wall and dropped out. Unless you count fringe candidates. There's nothing more to be gained by staying in. Unless to spite Bernie. Her staying in the race only damages the party and makes the prospects of beating Trump worse. A brokered convention is the scenario that maximizes inter-party enmity. Warren dropping out increases the likelihood that either Biden or Bernie reaches the majority threshold and avoids the brokered nightmare. I don't say this as a Bernie partisan. It's not clear where her supporters would go, and she could probably sway some of her supporters by endorsing. The way she has run her campaign, I wouldn't be surprised if she endorsed Biden. A Biden majority win is a much, much better outcome than a Biden plurality and brokered convention win.
	__________________ Gobble gobble Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 5th March 2020 at 05:19 AM.

5th March 2020, 05:31 AM	#3617
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,980	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon As stupid and selfish among the boomers as I thought though. Will laugh mercilessly if you re-elect Trump. What do you even mean by "boomer"? Someone who doesn't agree with you?
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th March 2020, 05:36 AM	#3618
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,980	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Some people think Trump is declining. I can only say he appears worse than he was several years ago. It might also be a feedback loop. He gets adulation by saying nonsense and being a dick, and he's internalised that by becoming more nonsensical and more offensive. It doesn't help.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th March 2020, 05:48 AM	#3619
Sideroxylon Featherless biped Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Aporia Posts: 24,443	Originally Posted by Belz... What do you even mean by "boomer"? Someone who doesn't agree with you? Yes, that’s right.

5th March 2020, 05:50 AM	#3620
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,980	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon Yes, that’s right. I would've prefered a serious answer to sarcasm, but I shouldn't expect more, I guess. Surely you don't mean "baby boomer", as the label doesn't match your use of it. So what is it?
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th March 2020, 06:00 AM	#3621
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,659	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon Will you be getting behind the progressive front runner or the ~~establishment choice~~ popular vote leader? FTFY
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

5th March 2020, 06:05 AM	#3622
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,450	I really don't understand the tone shift that has happened here. Biden has a tiny lead over Bernie. It's still very much a contested election. Biden has 28% of the delegates needed for a majority win Bernie has 25%. Biden is the frontrunner of a very close race in which lots of states are still left.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

5th March 2020, 06:06 AM	#3623
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,611	Originally Posted by angrysoba That might have been the idea. But I think Warren staying in the race is demonstrating her limited appeal. There is a debate on the 15th. in AZ. You see her appeal falling after sharing the debate stage with the two guys from the balcony on the muppets? I hope she stays in at least till after that debate. And preferably all the way to the end.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

5th March 2020, 06:08 AM	#3624
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,611	Originally Posted by Puppycow There's really no reason for her to stay in other than pride or stubbornness at this point. All the other also-rans have seen the writing on the wall and dropped out. Unless you count fringe candidates. There's nothing more to be gained by staying in. Unless to spite Bernie. There are still two months and more than half the delegates to go. If her financing does not dry up, she is going to start looking better and better by comparison to the frontrunners.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

5th March 2020, 06:12 AM	#3625
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,450	Originally Posted by Distracted1 There is a debate on the 15th. in AZ. You see her appeal falling after sharing the debate stage with the two guys from the balcony on the muppets? I hope she stays in at least till after that debate. And preferably all the way to the end. What does the path to victory look like for her? Winning a majority is out unless you honestly expect Warren to win states at like 60% or more. Edit: Quick calculation comes up with Warren needing to win 70% of all remaining pledged delegates to get a majority. Nobody thinks this is going to happen, right? Do you think that Warren can win a majority? The only reasonable path to victory for her is a contested convention. Given the coalescing of the rest of the party around Biden, I find it very hard to imagine that they would turn it over to Warren who would probably be coming in a distant third.
	__________________ Gobble gobble Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 5th March 2020 at 06:28 AM.

5th March 2020, 06:14 AM	#3626
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,718	Originally Posted by Distracted1 There are still two months and more than half the delegates to go. If her financing does not dry up, she is going to start looking better and better by comparison to the frontrunners. Those who don't like Sanders and those who don't like Biden can compromise by supporting Warren instead. Aren't both groups constantly yammering on about the greatness and necessity of compromise? Here's their opportunity to actually do it. Unless they are simply dirty hypocrites and only value compromise when they're trying to persuade others to give in. Surely not.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

5th March 2020, 06:16 AM	#3627
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 91,980	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Those who don't like Sanders and those who don't like Biden can compromise by supporting Warren instead. Aren't both groups constantly yammering on about the greatness and necessity of compromise? Hey, that's me!!
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th March 2020, 06:23 AM	#3628
d4m10n Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 6,659	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey I really don't understand the tone shift that has happened here. Biden has a tiny lead over Bernie. It's still very much a contested election. Very much so. We'll have a better idea what the new two-man race dynamic looks like next Wednesday. Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Do you think that Warren can win a majority? She may win enough to be the key powerbroker going in to Milwaukee, assuming no one makes it to 1,991.
	__________________ "Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin Last edited by d4m10n; 5th March 2020 at 06:25 AM.

5th March 2020, 06:33 AM	#3629
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,611	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Those who don't like Sanders and those who don't like Biden can compromise by supporting Warren instead. Aren't both groups constantly yammering on about the greatness and necessity of compromise? Here's their opportunity to actually do it. Unless they are simply dirty hypocrites and only value compromise when they're trying to persuade others to give in. Surely not. I think she mitigates a good deal of the Sanders' supporters bitterness. And provides all the "anyone but Sanders" with a better choice than the walking corpse that Biden seems to be.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

5th March 2020, 06:49 AM	#3630
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,611	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey What does the path to victory look like for her? Winning a majority is out unless you honestly expect Warren to win states at like 60% or more. Edit: Quick calculation comes up with Warren needing to win 70% of all remaining pledged delegates to get a majority. Nobody thinks this is going to happen, right? Do you think that Warren can win a majority? The only reasonable path to victory for her is a contested convention. Given the coalescing of the rest of the party around Biden, I find it very hard to imagine that they would turn it over to Warren who would probably be coming in a distant third. Brokered convention. What the Convention is supposed to be in the first place.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

5th March 2020, 06:57 AM	#3631
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 8,450	Originally Posted by Distracted1 Brokered convention. What the Convention is supposed to be in the first place. What exactly does that look like, in your mind? Warren comes in with enough delegates to deny both Bernie and Biden a majority win, then somehow she emerges as the candidate? The entire party apparatus is unified in supporting Biden. In what world are the superdelegates going to prefer Warren with like 10-15% of pledged delegates over Biden with like 35-45%? Best case scenario for Warren is she extracts a VP or cabinet position in exchange for her delegates. Doesn't seem like a good deal as it necessitates sending the party into chaotic infighting for a brokered convention.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

5th March 2020, 07:06 AM	#3632
Cabbage Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,598	Originally Posted by Aridas Mmm. This ended up longer than I like, but... I also don't feel like responding to all these individually. While generally ignoring those that they've chosen to represent them. Sure. McConnell's to blame for a lot. With that said, though, going by his record, Sanders frequently doesn't even really try to make things happen in the first place. Rather, it seems more like he frequently gives up preemptively, without even seriously trying to actually make things happen. Compare this to Warren, who has apparently got about a dozen bills passed recently, despite McConnell and the general obstructionism of the Republicans. Personally, I agree with you that Sanders has created a nationwide coalition of voters. With that said, there's not much evidence that it's strong enough to win many legislature spots to directly help him enact his agenda or usable enough to pressure current lawmakers into supporting his agenda... and that somewhat gets to one of the hearts of how unrealistic it is when he claims that his approach to getting things done will be to get the constituents of legislators to effectively force the legislators to give in. It... sorta is, pretty much by definition? He's chosen a particular tactic to accomplish things and he's failed to reach success with it over and over. That IS his responsibility, for better or worse. Regarding Bernie not getting anything done: I've seen others on this board complain about Bernie's supporters not realizing that Bernie as president would not be able to accomplish his agenda. What makes them think we are so naive? Every Bernie supporter I have spoken with is well aware he won't be able to push his agenda through as president. And I wouldn't fault him for that, in the face of GOP obstructionism. No, we are supporting him for the purpose of pushing the federal govt, however so slightly or not, to the left, after such dramatic swings to the right over the past few decades. And let me preemptively point out to anyone deciding to ask me: Wouldn't it be better to support a progressive left candidate who can get things done? 1. I'm not sure that's possible in the current political climate. 2. You vote for the progressive left candidate you have, not the progressive left candidate you want. Finally, for anyone who claims Warren is similar but she's accomplished more in the Senate: I'm on the record on this board stating on several occasions that I consider my support between Warren and Sanders a coin flip. I decided several months ago to vote for which ever had the momentum at the time of my state's primary. And that's exactly what I did.
Cabbage Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,598

5th March 2020, 07:15 AM	#3633
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,718	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey What exactly does that look like, in your mind? Warren comes in with enough delegates to deny both Bernie and Biden a majority win, then somehow she emerges as the candidate? The entire party apparatus is unified in supporting Biden. In what world are the superdelegates going to prefer Warren with like 10-15% of pledged delegates over Biden with like 35-45%? Best case scenario for Warren is she extracts a VP or cabinet position in exchange for her delegates. Doesn't seem like a good deal as it necessitates sending the party into chaotic infighting for a brokered convention. Perhaps she's hoping that either Sanders or Biden will drop dead in the next five days. The odds of that aren't very bad!
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

5th March 2020, 07:23 AM	#3634
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 31,394	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Perhaps she's hoping that either Sanders or Biden will drop dead in the next five days. The odds of that aren't very bad! There's a joke that the only job the VP has is to wake up every morning and ask if the President is still alive or not, then go back to bed. That might have to be updated to hourly check-ins.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

5th March 2020, 07:23 AM	#3635
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 40,586	E-freaking-gads. It's clear the Missouri primaries are coming up quick, the political ads have all been turned up to eleven. And everyone is evoking Obama like there's no tomorrow. Despite him not endorsing anyone, it seems like he's the star of every ad. I guess it's a good thing at one point or another, Obama had to introduce Warren, Sanders, and Biden to a crowd so they can all now use his introductory remarks as if it's an individual endorsement.
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes." Last edited by Mike!; 5th March 2020 at 07:27 AM.