Yeah there was definitely a chance for one of the deepest blue areas of the country to swing for Trump

Quote :

"that's the kind of attitude that bleeds over to people in states that aren't so safe, or perhaps even swing states because no one single vote matters statistically"

Maybe, so maybe it's time to learn that voter shaming doesn't work, as evidenced by 2016?

1/23/2019 4:54:19 PM

We need a candidate who can win Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania (in addition to keeping all of Hillary's 2016 states).

I hate the concept of only swing states matter in a campaign, but that's exactly what it will be this time. Although, there are some who think Texas can be flipped...I am not one of them, but if a Democrat can win Texas it changes the entire scope of American politics.

1/23/2019 9:01:19 PM

Nancy Pelosi for President in 2020

1/25/2019 3:18:02 PM

Why wait?

1/25/2019 3:35:24 PM

lol

1/25/2019 3:42:09 PM

^^LMAO

1/25/2019 3:44:16 PM

Third party combined with leftist purity tests will pretty much tank Dems in 2020, paving the way for another GOP victory. This “new” third party will set 21st century records on how many votes will flee, and will pave the way for proper authoritarianism to finally take root.

1/27/2019 5:07:16 PM

Rolling my eyes so hard at blaming leftist purity tests in the primary

1/27/2019 6:01:06 PM

Harris/ O’rourke
O’rourke/ Harris

Who gives a shit, beat Trump.

[Edited on January 27, 2019 at 9:03 PM. Reason : Not kidding about Pelosi anymore, either.]

1/27/2019 9:01:42 PM

Quote :

"so maybe it's time to learn that voter shaming doesn't work"

Says the guy getting voter shamed.

All of the current plausible Democratic candidates would be a vast improvement over the incumbent and should receive your vote and the vote of everyone else in this country who opposes Donald Trump. You can have your ideological knife fight after the country is brought back from the brink, I promise.

1/28/2019 8:10:18 AM

An “ideological knife fight” is fine and proper to have in a primary. It’s kind of the purpose, no? This thread is about the primary so I’m not even sure why we should question that? Isn’t this thread the perfect place to critically examine potential Democrat candidates?

(To your point, though not related to the primary thread, I have a hard time understanding how any progressive could have abstained or voted third party when it was so patently obvious that Trump and McConnell were going to stack the courts for generations — but no real point in crying over spilled milk now).

1/28/2019 8:18:13 AM

^^
2016 should have taught us that the candidate we choose matters. I get that you're a "sensible moderate" (aka protector of white supremacist power structures), but we need socialist policy to beat Trump.

1/28/2019 11:02:56 AM

The candidate we choose absolutely matters.

If you didn't vote in the 2016 general election you basically chose Trump. Who cares if you're in a blue state, votes matter even if the impact is only small. Those extra 5 million votes matter bc it shows people there is something to fight for.

1/28/2019 11:06:44 AM

If the 2016 Democratic primary was fought purely on ideological lines, then we wouldn't have had any problems. The problem was when Team Bernard went all 4chan/r_theDonald on Hillary after it was clear he wasn't going to win. The attacks on her trustworthiness, character, and all the "it was rigged!!!!" accusations played right into the hands of the Trump campaign. That's the shit that needs to be avoided this time around, go after voting records and ideological "purity" all you want.

1/28/2019 11:09:56 AM

lol what a warped view

she was a garbage candidate

trump didn't win because bernie supporters pointed that out

1/28/2019 11:23:38 AM

A garbage candidate who had a double digit polling lead two weeks before the election, until the Comey letter brought all the bullshit character assassination back into the headlines. We now know Russian bots were targeting midwest Democrats on social media specifically with the same lines of attacks used by Bernie (and Stein) supporters. You can call it warped all you want, it's reality, it's what happened. Own your shame.

1/28/2019 11:28:54 AM

-offered zero policy concessions to bernie supporters
-derided and shamed them
-picked tim kaine as her running mate

and STILL more of them voted for her than her supporters voted obama vs mccain

we need to stop listening to the people who were wrong last time

1/28/2019 11:29:26 AM

sanders ran a clean primary campaign and then campaigned for clinton, he refused to even go after her open FBI investigation and shutdown any email discussion and kept the primary ideological. he ran a cleaner campaign than she did against obama.

sanders was also a victim of russian trolls who were using him to sow discord in the democratic party. they were loud on parts of the internet but represented only a small portion of sanders supporters.

it is dishonest and untrue to claim that sanders supporters went full donald, they mostly voted for clinton and because of the primary they were the reason the progressive part of the party won some key concessions in regards to the party platform and how primaries would be conducted

1/28/2019 11:29:38 AM

Shrike, 11/5/16

Quote :

"I'm not going to put a percentage on his chances but it would basically require a bunch of unforeseen events (weather, terrorism, etc..) simultaneously hitting major population centers around the country that depress turnout. Short of that he has no realistic path to 270. With that said, I'll revise my affirmation on 538s model: it's not flawed, it's just wrong."

Quote :

"Meh, I believe in the data. Let me put it this way, if Trump wins this election then we can throw out literally everything we've learned about elections in this country because it no longer applies. Everyone who works in the industry may as well find new jobs."

1/28/2019 11:37:42 AM

Quote :

"had a double digit polling lead two weeks before the election,"

1) national polls are a little meaningless since the popular vote doesn't matter
2) no she didn't. 538 shows her best average lead was about 7%
3) pretty much every close battleground state poll showed margin of error losses the whole time

All that, and she still got a shit ton of votes. Can't blame Bernie for Comey.

1/28/2019 11:44:26 AM

^^And? No one thought Trump was going to win, not even his own campaign, who were leaking to reporters they had no path to 270 the day of the election. Frankly, the polling wasn't wrong, it was just slow to react to the conditions on the ground. Post-mortem analysis showed things tightening to tossup territory after the Comey letter. But hey, keep looking up my posts if you want, you might actually learn something!

^https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html#polls

Quote :

"CNBC 10/21 - 10/24 LV -- 47 37 Clinton +10 USA Today/Suffolk 10/20 - 10/24 1000 LV 3.0 49 39 Clinton +10 Associated Press-GfK 10/20 - 10/24 1212 LV -- 54 41 Clinton +13 ABC News Tracking 10/20 - 10/23 611 LV 4.5 53 41 Clinton +12"

Four high quality polls showing double digit leads right before the Comey letter dropped. It was her all time high in average polling, not sure if it was quite double digits in the aggregate, but it was damn close. Remember, Bernie supporters still argue he would have won based on polling that came out in April 2016, you can't have it both ways.

1/28/2019 11:55:00 AM

Go argue with those strawmen then....

1/28/2019 12:00:42 PM

was shrike also a clinton stan when she said it was important to stay in the primary in case obama got rfk'd?

1/28/2019 12:03:12 PM

Quote :

"No one thought Trump was going to win"

Get the fuck out with that, Bernie supporters called it over and over in the primaries, and many on the left continued to call it during the general.

And you chose to discount the polls that consistently showed him to be more electable than Clinton.

[Edited on January 28, 2019 at 12:06 PM. Reason : .]

1/28/2019 12:05:20 PM

Oh lord, here we go again.

2016 today. 2016 tomorrow. 2016 forever.

1/28/2019 12:16:50 PM

Not really, I was trying to find a compromise position between the fall inline behind the frontrunner posters, and the folks want who want a race to the hard left. Go after Kamala's record as AG. Make Beto explain his weird pro-Russian votes. Gillibrand should own her prior positions on immigration, guns, and give good answers to why they've changed. You want a good litmus test for what should be fair game? If it's being breathlessly reported on Fox News or tweeted by Ronna Romney, no Democratic candidate should bring it up.

1/28/2019 12:41:27 PM

so what the left is doing, got it

1/28/2019 1:09:13 PM

Quote :

"An “ideological knife fight” is fine and proper to have in a primary. It’s kind of the purpose, no?"

Well...kind of...but the biggest problem with primaries is that only those who self-select to be identified with that party's ideology get to vote in most states. Elections are won and lost by independent and centrist voters, so a long-lasting fight for the definition of the party's ideology hurts whoever is going to be on the ticket.

For Democrats, long primaries will help a candidate in the general if they are able to show the abilities to adapt, consider other views, and work with those who disagree with them. Long primaries hurt candidates who refuse to be moved. Compare Obama in 08 and Hillary in 16 and the difference is night and day. (Sort-of-related note, short primaries are never good for Democrats)

1/28/2019 3:10:23 PM

Schultz: overrated or way overrated?

1/28/2019 3:17:14 PM

i think the word is "embarrassing"

1/28/2019 3:26:33 PM

Republicans had a long drawn out primary that pulled the party far right. All that happened was a whipped up base against a boogeyman opponent and a presidential win.

Ill take one of those but with MFA and taxing the rich in place of walls and corruption.

1/28/2019 5:17:10 PM

^^^ one of the only candidates I’m likely to vote for. The Dems are gonna fuck this up. They might win anyway due to GOP self-immolation, but holy fuck what a shitshow in the making.

I’d go for Kasich, if he runs. I don’t think anyone remotely palatable, even under this sort of duress, can win the (D) nomination right now. Probably gonna be my 5th straight Presidential election where I shrug and say “fuck it”, even though I’m vastly more willing this time to vote for a candidate that I have divergent views from. I think I’d rather have a politically ineffective and term-limited President than one who holds a different set of destructive views and might be able to enact more of them over a longer period of time, even if it means 4 more years of the worst President in what, at least the last century?

[Edited on January 28, 2019 at 5:35 PM. Reason : Goddammit we are fucked]

1/28/2019 5:27:26 PM

adorable

1/28/2019 5:37:44 PM

^^Schultz today said he wouldn't want to speculate as to what he would do as president. What a perfect vanilla, centrist statement for your favorite candidate.

1/28/2019 5:42:29 PM

But guys remember the Duke votes based on who's the best on 5he issues!

1/28/2019 7:14:20 PM

Quote :

"Literally 30 seconds into Howard Schultz’s appearance in NY, there’s a heckler telling him “don’t re-elect Trump.” The heckler also mentions how Schultz keeps getting ratio-ed. https://t.co/Q6FUnT8YX8"

Quote :

"Protester stands up almost immediately at Schultz event: "You'll help elect Trump, you billionaire, egotistical asshole. Go back to getting ratio'd on twitter. go back to Davos with the other billionaire elite.""

[Edited on January 28, 2019 at 9:22 PM. Reason : WAIT A MINUTE LINKS ARE AUTOMATIC WTF]

[Edited on January 28, 2019 at 9:24 PM. Reason : Morw]

1/28/2019 9:21:56 PM

is it purity test knife fighting to let kamala harris disqualify herself in her own words?

https://twitter.com/WalkerBragman/status/1090056741688131584

1/29/2019 9:16:25 AM

^^ sounds like the Dems are already setting up their 2020 loss. "Anybody but..." has failed the last three times it has been used. Give the people someone sane to vote for, and they will respond accordingly. That folks are already attacking 3rd parties tells you that the Dems have nobody.

1/29/2019 10:35:24 AM

Hi. It seems you just woke up out of a coma. Anyway this is going to be weird, but the country elected Donald Trump in 2016 completely contradictory to what you said.

1/29/2019 10:56:36 AM

You know who is most upset about Elizabeth Warren's heritage and DNA test gaff? Rich white people who never otherwise gave two craps about the well-being and autonomy of Native tribes.

She as of right now is still the candidate I'm most likely to support.

1/29/2019 5:24:56 PM

Quote :

"Give the people someone sane to vote for, and they will respond accordingly."

Who are these people, and how did they vote in 2016?

1/29/2019 7:20:08 PM

I dunno. There weren't any good choices in 2016.

^^^
1) I was talking about an incumbent President.
2) Both major party campaigns in 2016 were basically "anybody but..." campaigns

[Edited on January 29, 2019 at 7:28 PM. Reason : ]

1/29/2019 7:25:07 PM

[Edited on January 29, 2019 at 7:29 PM. Reason : Clinton and Trump -- they're all the same guys!]

[Edited on January 29, 2019 at 7:31 PM. Reason : Trump and every other Republican candidate -- also all the same!]

[Edited on January 29, 2019 at 7:32 PM. Reason : Another to emphasize aaronburro's "They're all the same!" bullshit.]

1/29/2019 7:27:36 PM

Beautiful straw man you're setting up there.

1/29/2019 7:35:47 PM

You didn't even hint at your point being about incumbent, but isn't every incumbent election "anybody but"? That's kinda the whole point?

And Hilary Clinton was basically the candidate since like 2014 and they didn't know the republican candidate was til late in the Rep primary. Not sure how that's "anybody but" from the Dem side.

And FOH. You may not like Clinton but she is obviously and easily a "sane" candidate.

1/29/2019 8:31:40 PM

Shit, pretty much the entire Republican primary field was 'sane' relative to Trump.

1/29/2019 9:17:18 PM

Kamala Harris already backtracking on being a progressive re: health care.

1/30/2019 8:52:09 PM

told yall - https://splinternews.com/just-a-long-sigh-of-relief-1832193016

Quote :

"She’s not running! Speaking to CNN on Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton’s former campaign chairman John Podesta confirmed Clinton won’t run for president in 2020, despite multiple rounds of media speculation to the contrary."

[Edited on January 31, 2019 at 5:03 PM. Reason : ]

1/31/2019 5:03:10 PM

Thank goodness

2/1/2019 4:20:12 AM

Booker officially running

2/1/2019 7:47:30 AM