View Poll Results: Who's your favourite candidate for the 2020 Democratic Primaries?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bernie Sanders.

    19 48.72%
  • Joe Biden.

    5 12.82%
  • Neither.

    15 38.46%
Page 31 of 116 FirstFirst ... 62122232425262728293031323334353637383940415681 ... LastLast
Results 601 to 620 of 2310

Thread: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

  1. #601

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    How are Democrat programs incoherent?

  2. #602

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Elfdude View Post
    I'm not sure what your point is epic. Did Trump increase spending his first budget period? Yes. Was it set to decline? Yes. Was the reduction mostly down to active military actions? Yes. Does heathen's point that people don't like to spend money on Obama's military make any sense consider trump is doing more? No. He also is proposing to increase it, open or significantly increase theaters of war with Iran/Middle East and South Americas.
    I wasn't making a specific political point, I was just providing some additional information.



  3. #603

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    The current presidency. Economy is doing great. Record low unemployment rates. Less amount of world policeman LARPing then with his more war-happy predecessors. He clearly is doing well and has much to offer to the population, unlike Democrats, who still go with "orange man bad" and "free stuff" instead of having a coherent program.
    So, you can't explain how Trump has a coherent program? Hence, you're deflecting by trying to talk about your perception of the state of the country. If anything is going OK in USA it is happening despite Trump. Will you tell us what coherent program Trump has?
    The Armenian Issue

  4. #604

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    So, you can't explain how Trump has a coherent program? Hence, you're deflecting by trying to talk about your perception of the state of the country. If anything is going OK in USA it is happening despite Trump. Will you tell us what coherent program Trump has?
    So it is happening despite Trump? Do you have any legitimate sources (not CNN or its tier) for that claim?

  5. #605

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    So it is happening despite Trump? Do you have any legitimate sources (not CNN or its tier) for that claim?
    Are you not going to explain what coherent program Trump has? Or, were you trying to use a fancy word like "coherent"?
    The Armenian Issue

  6. #606
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,057

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    And one would have to be extra kind of delusional to think that Trump wouldn't easily crush Biden...
    Who knows. I would rather not make predictions...in fact Biden is a boring candidate. Even worse, he thinks he has already won, and says whatever is necessary to please everyone.
    Last June, Biden assured rich donors that "No one’s standard of living would change. Nothing would fundamentally change" (sic)
    If is that the case, why is he running for President?
    In my opinion, the democrats should vote for someone who wants to make a real difference: Sanders or Warren.

    Joe Biden inspires no one — not even his own wife Guardian

    Can we stop pretending that Joe Biden is the inevitable 2020 candidate?

    To be sure, Joe Biden is leading among Democrats thus far. The RealClearPolitics average has him ahead of Bernie Sanders by around 12 points, and he has the support of major party funders.
    But less than a third of Democratic voters are planning to vote for Biden, down from more than 40% the week after his 25 April announcement.

    An Economist/YouGov poll from this week shows the race narrowing to within the margin of error – Biden at 22%, Sanders at 19%, and Elizabeth Warren at 18%.

    the media narrative continues to paint Sanders as a fringe pariah and Biden as the inevitable 2020 candidate. It’s reminiscent of the 2016 Republican primaries, in which Donald Trump was considered an unserious candidate whose support was continually underestimated.
    Disclaimer: I'm biased toward Sanders/Warren....but I guess I'm right: Biden is an uninspiring candidate.
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  7. #607
    Cookiegod's Avatar CIVUS DIVUS EX CLIBANO
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,452

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    So great that the rulers of the Democrat party have learned nothing from 2016.
    Some main candidates with a past that should make them ineligible, yet somehow are the establishment favourites, and of course the shutting down of candidates who actually do have something to say.

    Biden's connections to Ukraine, China & co. are just as bad as what Hillary has been up to, Kamala's prosecutorial record that had her deliberately hide evidence that exhonerated a falsely accused, to keep an innocent man imprisoned for as long as possible, and clearly neither of them have any actual intent to improve things.

    Tulsi Gabbard as one of the few candidates with something to say being constantly and deliberately smeared and now excluded from the debate round just sums it all up.

    Brace yourselves for 4 more years of the biggest troll or a Democrat who pretends to be nicer, but does just about the exact same things. Except maybe for a bit more of good ol' "positive" racial & sexist discrimination & even more wars. YAAAAAAAY!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  8. #608
    alhoon's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    24,753

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Tulsi Gabbard was a bottom feeder that didn't have traction to keep her afloat. It's not the evil "rulers" of the Democratic party, it's that the "rank and file" didn't buy what she was selling.
    alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
    "Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  9. #609

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Gabbard is based: of course she wasn't going to get anywhere near the nomination.



  10. #610

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    Brace yourselves for 4 more years of the biggest troll or a Democrat who pretends to be nicer, but does just about the exact same things. Except maybe for a bit more of good ol' "positive" racial & sexist discrimination & even more wars. YAAAAAAAY!
    Are you saying you don’t like Warren or Sanders? Or do you believe Biden will somehow win the nomination by default?
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  11. #611
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,057

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    As a side note...my two cents: in the US, Electoral College members don't have to follow the vote of the people. As a Non-American, comparing it to the democracy I live in, the Electoral college is an institution against my country's definition of democracy: one person= one vote. Historically speaking, the American electoral college is a byproduct of the Southern slavery system.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    According to James Madison, a direct election would prove unacceptable to the South, because the North would outnumber the South, where the slaves could not vote.Quoting,
    "The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes"

    Whether you like it or not, it's a system rooted in institutional racism, by white people to white people, totally inappropriate to the current generation of young Americans and those to come. America needs to get rid of the electoral system...
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  12. #612

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Well, since you brought it up, the slave state/free state dynamic was primarily addressed by the three fifths compromise. The Electoral College had more to do with small state/large state conflicts and the Founders’ aversion to mob rule/populist dictatorship. Madison himself was a staunch supporter of popular election of presidents.


    Anyway, the electoral college was/is supposed to be both a moderating influence on the whims of the masses, and also a hedge against corporate cabals and entrenched political factions manipulating the electoral process. This is not some kind of racist or oligarchic conspiracy. For the last 30 years, ie the amount of time complaining about the college has been most fashionable, electors have been bound by the popular vote in their states. If the majority of people in New York vote for John Smith, New York electors must vote for him as well.


    The college merely helps even out a degree of the population disparities between states, since the number of electors is determined by the number of congressional representatives in a given state. In other words, if you don’t like Donald Trump or George Bush, don’t blame the electoral college, blame South Dakota. Getting rid of the electoral college means coastal population centers pick the president, and that’s a recipe for civil war, as much as it was when the divide was between slave states and free states.
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

  13. #613
    alhoon's Avatar Comes Rei Militaris
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Chania, Greece
    Posts
    24,753

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Well, since you brought it up, the slave state/free state dynamic was primarily addressed by the three fifths compromise. The Electoral College had more to do with small state/large state conflicts and the Founders’ aversion to mob rule/populist dictatorship. Madison himself was a staunch supporter of popular election of presidents.


    Anyway, the electoral college was/is supposed to be both a moderating influence on the whims of the masses, and also a hedge against corporate cabals and entrenched political factions manipulating the electoral process. This is not some kind of racist or oligarchic conspiracy. For the last 30 years, ie the amount of time complaining about the college has been most fashionable, electors have been bound by the popular vote in their states. If the majority of people in New York vote for John Smith, New York electors must vote for him as well.


    The college merely helps even out a degree of the population disparities between states, since the number of electors is determined by the number of congressional representatives in a given state. In other words, if you don’t like Donald Trump or George Bush, don’t blame the electoral college, blame South Dakota. Getting rid of the electoral college means coastal population centers pick the president, and that’s a recipe for civil war, as much as it was when the divide was between slave states and free states.
    I respectfully disagree in several parts of this post.

    - Faithless electors in most states face no penalty for ignoring the law and voting whatever they like. 10 states only cancel the votes of faithless electors and it's not many electors in those states. As such, nope, most electors can pretty much do whatever they like and pay a fine.
    - Nope, New York state has no law binding the elector to vote as the state. Not only no penalty, but no law. New York Electors may or may not take into consideration what the state voted as they please. Presidential elections in New York State are simply an opinion poll.
    - Coastal population centers have the most people so there's an argument that they should pick the president. I am not 100% sold on that idea though, since those population centers have very high density. Generally, I am in favor of making the "Wyoming vote equals 2.5 California votes" a bit more balanced, but not one for one.
    - You can help even out a degree of disparity in population without the Electoral college as most Western democracies do: by adjustments. If you want Wyoming votes to be 2.5 x California votes, just say so and do it without electors. So no, you won't have a civil war if you abolish the electoral college but still make Wyoming's votes count as 2.5 x Californian ones.

    That said, here's what I think would be best:
    Electoral college or not, abolish the unfair winner-takes-all rules. And states can do that. Simply put, Winner-takes-all makes California and Texas, the two largest states, mostly nothingburgers and the only states that are "worth" fighting for are the swinger states.
    And yet, California has 40% Republicans. They have more Republicans than half the states have voters. Sure, that's ~15% less than the Democrats. But they deserve their votes to count. They don't get up to go and vote, because what's the damn point? Democrats would win anyway. So it ends up as 62% Democrats, 32% Republicans.

    Electoral college? Fine. Do it as "each electoral district puts the elector from the party that won for that district and state-winner gets the 2 extra electors" of Maine and Nebraska. That way, suddenly California is very much in play! 7 electors would have been Republicans if it went by district instead of State-wide. Not to mention, that candidates in 48-49 district of California (That were close) may have gone out to vote.

    As such:
    "In other words, if you don’t like Donald Trump or George Bush, don’t blame the electoral college, blame South Dakota the winner-takes-all system." Without it, even with the Electoral college, Trump and Bush 2 would have lost.
    alhoon is not a member of the infamous Hoons: a (fictional) nazi-sympathizer KKK clan. Of course, no Hoon would openly admit affiliation to the uninitiated.
    "Angry Uncle Gordon" describes me well.
    _______________________________________________________
    Beta-tester for Darthmod Empire, the default modification for Empire Total War that does not ask for your money behind patreon.
    Developer of Causa Belli submod for Darthmod, headed by Hammeredalways and a ton of other people.
    Developer of LtC: Random maps submod for Lands to Conquer (that brings a multitude of random maps and other features).

  14. #614

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Well, since you brought it up, the slave state/free state dynamic was primarily addressed by the three fifths compromise. The Electoral College had more to do with small state/large state conflicts and the Founders’ aversion to mob rule/populist dictatorship. Madison himself was a staunch supporter of popular election of presidents.


    Anyway, the electoral college was/is supposed to be both a moderating influence on the whims of the masses, and also a hedge against corporate cabals and entrenched political factions manipulating the electoral process. This is not some kind of racist or oligarchic conspiracy. For the last 30 years, ie the amount of time complaining about the college has been most fashionable, electors have been bound by the popular vote in their states. If the majority of people in New York vote for John Smith, New York electors must vote for him as well.


    The college merely helps even out a degree of the population disparities between states, since the number of electors is determined by the number of congressional representatives in a given state. In other words, if you don’t like Donald Trump or George Bush, don’t blame the electoral college, blame South Dakota. Getting rid of the electoral college means coastal population centers pick the president, and that’s a recipe for civil war, as much as it was when the divide was between slave states and free states.
    How does getting rid of the electoral college mean that coastal population centers decide? And why should we care about evening out the population disparity between states? IT IS A NATIONAL ELECTION. The states aren't the ones voting... people are... based on their individual interests ( not state interests!). If you were to get rid of the electoral college, everyone's vote counts equally, unlike currently where arbitrary state boundaries can disproportionally increase or decrease the value of the vote.

    On your comment about a civil war... not going to happen. This isn't 1861 where the stakes were lower and where the people's future ability to live a stable life was still possible after the conclusion of the war. Maybe you see Republicans attempt an authoritarian approach to rigging the system in their favor to hold onto power, but there is only so much tolerance for that from the population. It's more likely the Republican party continue to shift (like it has done year after year), and attempt to evolve into a party that is still relevant in American politics.

  15. #615

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by ♔The Black Knight♔ View Post
    How does getting rid of the electoral college mean that coastal population centers decide? And why should we care about evening out the population disparity between states? IT IS A NATIONAL ELECTION. The states aren't the ones voting... people are... based on their individual interests ( not state interests!). If you were to get rid of the electoral college, everyone's vote counts equally, unlike currently where arbitrary state boundaries can disproportionally increase or decrease the value of the vote.

    On your comment about a civil war... not going to happen. This isn't 1861 where the stakes were lower and where the people's future ability to live a stable life was still possible after the conclusion of the war. Maybe you see Republicans attempt an authoritarian approach to rigging the system in their favor to hold onto power, but there is only so much tolerance for that from the population. It's more likely the Republican party continue to shift (like it has done year after year), and attempt to evolve into a party that is still relevant in American politics.
    The US is a huge country. Having an electoral system which takes the regional interests of areas with lower population densities into account is important for national unity. The disproportionate power of certain urban centres in western countries is already a problem without exacerbating it further.



  16. #616

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by ♔The Black Knight♔ View Post
    And why should we care about evening out the population disparity between states? IT IS A NATIONAL ELECTION.
    Maybe you see Republicans attempt an authoritarian approach to rigging the system in their favor to hold onto power
    Can't make this stuff up.
    Ignore List (to save time):

    Exarch, Coughdrop addict

  17. #617

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by ep1c_fail View Post
    The US is a huge country. Having an electoral system which takes the regional interests of areas with lower population densities into account is important for national unity. The disproportionate power of certain urban centres in western countries is already a problem without exacerbating it further.
    We do have elections that takes into account of regional interests. It's our elections involving our representatives and senators. That's where your regional representation comes into play in the national government. In fact, rural voters (and their interests) and rural states are disproportionately empowered in Congress (which I am fine with).

    Also, why do you guys assume the urban centers have interests that are ubiquitous. They are diverse areas whose population possesses multiple identities that can be fought for. The only reason the urban populations are skewed one way currently is because Republicans haven't tried reaching for them. There is potential there.
    Last edited by ♔The Black Knight♔; August 30, 2019 at 11:42 AM.

  18. #618

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodromos View Post
    Can't make this stuff up.
    Considering that both Republicans and Democrats have gerryrigged elections in their state governments to make it easier for them to retain power, or have tried altering procedural rules to help their own parties out, you shouldn't just assume it could never happen.

    Democrats could possibly do the same if they were in that position. I'm not saying this is a Republican thing, its a human nature thing.

  19. #619

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Legio_Italica View Post
    Are you saying you don’t like Warren or Sanders? Or do you believe Biden will somehow win the nomination by default?
    Well, since Warren and Sanders are awful all around, Biden will look more appealing to a majority of Americans. Kamala Harris, Spartacus, Beta O'Rourke, and Mayor Dumbassname are terrible candidates, too. I'd say that among the top ten highest polling candidates, Biden is the least polarizing one (with the possible exception of Yang?). The rest is all playing wacky identity politics.

  20. #620

    Default Re: USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

    Quote Originally Posted by alhoon View Post
    I respectfully disagree in several parts of this post.


    - Faithless electors in most states face no penalty for ignoring the law and voting whatever they like. 10 states only cancel the votes of faithless electors and it's not many electors in those states. As such, nope, most electors can pretty much do whatever they like and pay a fine.
    - Nope, New York state has no lawbinding the elector to vote as the state. Not only no penalty, but no law. New York Electors may or may not take into consideration what the state voted as they please. Presidential elections in New York State are simply an opinion poll.
    I’m not sure what exactly you’re referring to here. Political parties whip the vote pretty effectively among electors, and those who don’t go along with the popular vote usually won’t be electors for very long. Faithless electors almost always go for third parties or non-candidates, and have altered the outcome of a presidential election all of one time over 200 years ago. The idea that the electoral college is some kind of clandestine cabal of oligarchs who can do as they please simply isn’t true.
    - Coastal population centers have the most people so there's an argument that they shouldpick the president. I am not 100% sold on that idea though, since those population centers have very high density. Generally, I am in favor of making the "Wyoming vote equals 2.5 California votes" a bit more balanced, but not one for one.
    - You can help even out a degree of disparity in population without the Electoral college as most Western democracies do: by adjustments. If you wantWyoming votes to be 2.5 x California votes, just say so and do it without electors. So no, you won't have a civil war if you abolish the electoral college but still make Wyoming's votes count as 2.5 x Californian ones.
    Why would people go to all the trouble of either going state by state to change laws, or passing a constitutional amendment, just to replace the electoral college with a set of rules that functionally serves the exact same purpose?
    That said, here's what I think would be best:
    Electoral college or not, abolish the unfair winner-takes-allrules. And states can do that. Simply put, Winner-takes-all makes California and Texas, the two largest states, mostly nothingburgers and the only states that are "worth" fighting for are the swinger states.
    And yet, California has 40% Republicans. They have more Republicans than half the states have voters. Sure, that's ~15% less than the Democrats. But they deserve their votes to count. They don't get up to go and vote, because what's the damn point? Democrats would win anyway. So it ends up as 62% Democrats, 32% Republicans.


    Electoral college? Fine. Do it as "each electoral district puts the elector from the party that won for that districtand state-winner gets the 2 extra electors" of Maine and Nebraska. That way, suddenly California is very much in play!7 electors would have been Republicans if it went by district instead of State-wide. Not to mention, that candidates in 48-49 district of California (That were close) may have gone out to vote.


    As such:
    "In other words, if you don’t like Donald Trump or George Bush, don’t blame the electoral college, blame South Dakota the winner-takes-all system." Without it, even with the Electoral college, Trump and Bush 2 would have lost.
    Advocating for Nebraska and Maine’s elector rules is quite different from advocating for abolition of the college altogether. I have no problem with your idea. In any case, my original point still stands:



    1. The electoral college is an adjustment for population density, not a vestigial, racist apparatus.
    2. Direct popular election of the president is a recipe for civil and political fragmentation, which is exactly why the college was developed in the first place.



    The US is a republican union of states. People in large states are obviously going to complain that they “don’t count,” but that’s no more true than the small states’ assertions that the “liberal elites” on the coasts are holding them hostage.
    Quote Originally Posted by ♔The Black Knight♔ View Post
    How does getting rid of the electoral college mean that coastal population centers decide? And why should we care about evening out the population disparity between states? IT IS A NATIONAL ELECTION. The states aren't the ones voting... people are... based on their individual interests ( not state interests!). If you were to get rid of the electoral college, everyone's vote counts equally, unlike currently where arbitrary state boundaries can disproportionally increase or decrease the value of the vote.
    Well, no. If you get rid of the electoral college and shift to a national popular vote, 90% plus of the geographic area of the country is electorally irrelevant. The only political representation these minorities would have is a few representatives in a Congress whose power is already mostly divided according to population density. Your inference that regional and local political cleavages should not be taken into account when governing the country categorically rejects the principle of popular sovereignty since people living outside a few major urban areas would have little or no say in who becomes president and determines national priorities.


    As for your claim that such a situation would not cause an eventual political and civil fragmentation, I can only point you to every civil war in recorded history. If the electoral college has to go, then at least abolish the 17th Amendment too while at it.
    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    Well, since Warren and Sanders are awful all around, Biden will look more appealing to a majority of Americans. Kamala Harris, Spartacus, Beta O'Rourke, and Mayor Dumbassname are terrible candidates, too. I'd say that among the top ten highest polling candidates, Biden is the least polarizing one (with the possible exception of Yang?). The rest is all playing wacky identity politics.
    Warren and Sanders are tied with if not beating Biden in the polls. Republicans aren’t going to vote for a centrist Democrat over Trump. A majority of Americans already disapprove of Trump consistently since he was elected, and all polling has pretty much any Dem frontrunner beating Trump by a landslide. I get that “you” don’t like Sanders or Warren, but I don’t get how that translates to “the majority of Americans.”
    Of these facts there cannot be any shadow of doubt: for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by Christian institutions; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things-nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before, or will come to be known in the ages that have yet to be. - Pope Leo XIII

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •