2020 Presidential Election

[biggentleben]

Completely nonsensical post...

 

With Biden running, can we please have Amy Poehler at every one of his rallies? That has to be one of my favorite character quirks in a recent sitcom.

[Squirrel]

Thanks for pointing this out. As well meaning as everyone here is, we lose sight of this, because, well, you are the only female poster around here. I'm not sure how well Bernie or the others males connect with women, but they don't have Biden's baggage (even if not on the level of Trump, no one deserves to be touched how they do not want to be touched (or smelled?)).

This isn’t the NYT or WaPo, nor does it come from NPR, BBC or 538 (news sources I typically go to), but it does address a sentiment. No, Bernie doesn’t represent me. I won’t support either Bernie or Biden in the primaries. Neither will even get my consideration. Neither, I think, truly gets it. And it’s likely it’s more of a generational thing with them. That I have the choice of many who are just as or more capable and qualified, and that they are woman, makes me happy.

 

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a26517395/bernie-sanders-2020-campaign-gender-comments-explained/

[Brock Beauchamp]

I guess I don't know what his appeal will be to people of color. But if the hard left can't swallow their pride and vote "Not Trump" then I have some rather profane words I'd want to share with them.

People of color left me baffled in 2016. From my perspective, Bernie seemed like the obvious choice but, by and large, PoC went big for Clinton.

 

Maybe I’m missing something here but it left me pretty confused at the time. Dunno why a big bank establishment moderate was so popular within those demographics (other than her husband, but I don’t really get that in context of the 21st century, either).

[Squirrel]

People of color left me baffled in 2016. From my perspective, Bernie seemed like the obvious choice but, by and large, PoC went big for Clinton.

 

Maybe I’m missing something here but it left me pretty confused at the time. Dunno why a big bank establishment moderate was so popular within those demographics (other than her husband, but I don’t really get that in context of the 21st century, either).

Given his responses to specific issues when asked kind of answers that.

[gunnarthor]

 

People of color left me baffled in 2016. From my perspective, Bernie seemed like the obvious choice but, by and large, PoC went big for Clinton.

Maybe I’m missing something here but it left me pretty confused at the time. Dunno why a big bank establishment moderate was so popular within those demographics (other than her husband, but I don’t really get that in context of the 21st century, either).

To her credit, she talked to POC, campaigned in their cities and spoke with their community leaders. Bernie basically ignored them and seemed to be baffled why they weren't supporting his policies. Clinton did a lot of things wrong but her outreach in the primaries was not one of them.

[PseudoSABR]

 

This isn’t the NYT or WaPo, nor does it come from NPR, BBC or 538 (news sources I typically go to), but it does address a sentiment. No, Bernie doesn’t represent me. I won’t support either Bernie or Biden in the primaries. Neither will even get my consideration. Neither, I think, truly gets it. And it’s likely it’s more of a generational thing with them. That I have the choice of many who are just as or more capable and qualified, and that they are woman, makes me happy.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a26517395/bernie-sanders-2020-campaign-gender-comments-explained/

Harper's is a long running credible publication, no need to hedge.  Haven't read the article but I do intend to.

[TheLeviathan]

 

People of color left me baffled in 2016. From my perspective, Bernie seemed like the obvious choice but, by and large, PoC went big for Clinton.

Maybe I’m missing something here but it left me pretty confused at the time. Dunno why a big bank establishment moderate was so popular within those demographics (other than her husband, but I don’t really get that in context of the 21st century, either).

 

The Democratic base is fickle, hence why I'm leaving my options wide open on who I'd support.  I have no idea who will rally behind who and what that will look like.  In Clinton, I had serious concerns about her but I thought she'd carry enough people to win.  She didn't and we have to learn from that.  Focus on the areas that are up for grabs.

 

My vote in the primaries doesn't much matter, I'm just hoping the Dems play nice and keep the big picture in mind: Beat Trump.  If electing someone that isn't your cup of tea is the way to do it?  Do it.  Shut up and like it.  The greater cause is unseating Trump.

[Brock Beauchamp]

To her credit, she talked to POC, campaigned in their cities and spoke with their community leaders. Bernie basically ignored them and seemed to be baffled why they weren't supporting his policies. Clinton did a lot of things wrong but her outreach in the primaries was not one of them.

Fair enough but the skewed response really confused me (literally 90/10 in some states). I know Clinton had the ground game but the disparate results still left me scratching my head.

[Brock Beauchamp]

The Democratic base is fickle, hence why I'm leaving my options wide open on who I'd support. I have no idea who will rally behind who and what that will look like. In Clinton, I had serious concerns about her but I thought she'd carry enough people to win. She didn't and we have to learn from that. Focus on the areas that are up for grabs.

 

My vote in the primaries doesn't much matter, I'm just hoping the Dems play nice and keep the big picture in mind: Beat Trump. If electing someone that isn't your cup of tea is the way to do it? Do it. Shut up and like it. The greater cause is unseating Trump.

We’re pretty close to 100% agreement on this. I supported Sanders in 2016 but didn’t have to think too hard to vote Clinton when the time came.

 

But obviously, that wasn’t a winning strategy for the movement as a whole.

 

I’ll show up and vote, as will most posters here. We’re not really the target demo.

[TheLeviathan]

 

We’re pretty close to 100% agreement on this. I supported Sanders in 2016 but didn’t have to think too hard to vote Clinton when the time came.

But obviously, that wasn’t a winning strategy for the movement as a whole.

I’ll show up and vote, as will most posters here. We’re not really the target demo.

 

Correct, the poles of the parties may not like it, but the votes up for grabs are not typically at the poles.

 

I don't think there was a path to victory for the Dems last year.  Not with Sanders and Clinton as the options.  I think this field represents a better array of people.  I just hope they choose wisely.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Correct, the poles of the parties may not like it, but the votes up for grabs are not typically at the poles.

 

I don't think there was a path to victory for the Dems last year.  Not with Sanders and Clinton as the options.  I think this field represents a better array of people.  I just hope they choose wisely.

Which is why I support Warren (policy) and Klobuchar (pragmatic). 

 

I'd put either one of them against Trump and be confident. Warren will be her bull self and Klobuchar will be her passive, yet firm, Midwestern self. 

 

I think Warren can win big in some of the middle while Klobuchar can win even bigger in the middle (though not the coasts).

[Squirrel]

Which is why I support Warren (policy) and Klobuchar (pragmatic). 

 

I'd put either one of them against Trump and be confident. Warren will be her bull self and Klobuchar will be her passive, yet firm, Midwestern self. 

 

I think Warren can win big in some of the middle while Klobuchar can win even bigger in the middle (though not the coasts).

Would it work if both were on the ticket?

[TheLeviathan]

 

Would it work if both were on the ticket?

 

That was what I was going to ask too.  I worry that too much damage has already been done to Warren over the last few years by the right.  Not to the level of Clinton, but the slurs and insults about her have been rampant on the right.  

 

But my worry most about her is that she is a liberal, coastal, college professor.  That is a rough sell in some of the places needed to win.  I say all that liking Warren on policy quite a bit.  I think she's brilliant and would be brilliant in debates.  I'm just not sure that's enough to offset those three qualities.

 

Klobuchar is less liberal and not coastal and also excellent in debates/discussing ideas.  She's also not particularly vibrant.  

 

Maybe as a team they offset each others weaknesses.  Or maybe they neutralize each others strengths.  I'm not sure how I feel about that, which is why this feeling out process is critical.

[gunnarthor]

My guess is that the Klobuchar doesn't have a real avenue to win in the field (although she'll clearly bet big on Iowa) but she'd be a great VP for Biden or Sanders. (I think Warren would have to pick a man to be her VP). So I expect that she'll go hard after Harris and Beto early in the primary season to advertise her attack dog bonafides, sort of how Christie took out Rubio for Trump.

 

If she's lackluster in the primaries and just hangs around, she'd be an uninspiring VP pick.

[biggentleben]

I just don't want to see Klobuchar on the ticket. I'd never vote for her, no matter the seat. She is the type of lawyer who trumpets protecting women by creating charges out of things that don't exist. It makes it even harder for a woman with a legit complaint to get respect and be heard when someone like Klobuchar is falsifying charges to appear more "pro-woman".

 

Carol can chew me out on this one all she wants, and I'm "glad" to go private with more details, but the woman should be disbarred, not running for president.

[gunnarthor]

 

I just don't want to see Klobuchar on the ticket. I'd never vote for her, no matter the seat. She is the type of lawyer who trumpets protecting women by creating charges out of things that don't exist. It makes it even harder for a woman with a legit complaint to get respect and be heard when someone like Klobuchar is falsifying charges to appear more "pro-woman".

 

Carol can chew me out on this one all she wants, and I'm "glad" to go private with more details, but the woman should be disbarred, not running for president.

Klobuchar is certainly a confusing candidate. On paper, she's a pretty strong option. But I know a lot of people in MN that can't stand her and some pretty impressive lawyers I know joke about the one time she went to court (implying she wasn't much of a lawyer, letting all the legal duties go to others). Yet she wins statewide votes by landslide margins and is popular with the type of voters the Dems need to win back.

 

I'll vote Democratic party no matter what in 2020 though.

[Mr. Brooks]

I just don't want to see Klobuchar on the ticket. I'd never vote for her, no matter the seat. She is the type of lawyer who trumpets protecting women by creating charges out of things that don't exist. It makes it even harder for a woman with a legit complaint to get respect and be heard when someone like Klobuchar is falsifying charges to appear more "pro-woman".

 

Carol can chew me out on this one all she wants, and I'm "glad" to go private with more details, but the woman should be disbarred, not running for president.

If the information you have is credible then you should be able to post it here.

If you'll only do it privately, then it's pretty lame to hit and run with stuff like this.

[PseudoSABR]

 

If the information you have is credible then you should be able to post it here.
If you'll only do it privately, then it's pretty lame to hit and run with stuff like this.

Or he's respecting the privacy of people he knows!

[Brock Beauchamp]

If the information you have is credible then you should be able to post it here.

If you'll only do it privately, then it's pretty lame to hit and run with stuff like this.

Ben’s a standup guy and I’ve been posting with him for about 15 years.

 

But if he has a story to share and it doesn’t have a specific reason to stay private, I welcome him to share it.

[Mr. Brooks]

Or he's respecting the privacy of people he knows!

Then he shouldn't say anything at all.

There is something greasy feeling when someone says something like, "this person has done terrible things, but I can't say what they've done or how I know. You just have to trust me that they've done terrible things."

 

If you can't say what happened, then don't even imply that something did. It's not fair.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Then he shouldn't say anything at all.
There is something greasy feeling when someone says something like, "this person has done terrible things, but I can't say what they've done or how I know. You just have to trust me that they've done terrible things."

If you can't say what happened, then don't even imply that something did. It's not fair.

I don't disagree.  But you have to weigh the harm of NOT saying something against the harm of saying something incomplete.  Ben's earned some latitude with me in that regard, so I trust him to that he balanced the costs and made a moral decision. 

[Mr. Brooks]

I don't disagree. But you have to weigh the harm of NOT saying something against the harm of saying something incomplete. Ben's earned some latitude with me in that regard, so I trust him to make that he balanced the costs and made a moral decision.

I think accusations as strong as "she should be disbarred" require some substantiation.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I think accusations as strong as "she should be disbarred" require some substantiation.

Well, certainly Ben's opinion doesn't make me adopt that she should be disbarred, but it does suggest something highly problematic, and combined with my distaste for prosecutors-turned-politicians generally, I can't see me supporting her in the primary.  

 

Prosecutors are notorious for hiding exculpatory evidence, using interrogations as evidence of uncoerced self-confession etc. with little-to-no accountability.  So it's a very believable all to common tale.

[Mr. Brooks]

I don't care who says it, or how good their reputation is. Without substantiation of some kind, or at least a willingness to make a first hand claim, rather than vague third hand suggestions, it's meaningless gossip to me.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I don't care who says it, or how good their reputation is. Without substantiation of some kind, or at least a willingness to make a first hand claim, rather than vague third hand suggestions, it's meaningless gossip to me.

That's fair.  As Brock has said, some of us just have known each other for nearly two decades.  I'm sure you'd regard people you trust's reasons for not revealing differently than an internet forum poster.  Let's not belabor the discussion.  I appreciate your cynicism, but I also respect Ben's need for privacy; it's the context of prosecutions generally that allows me to give it weight; I don't blame you for not sharing that POV.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't care who says it, or how good their reputation is. Without substantiation of some kind, or at least a willingness to make a first hand claim, rather than vague third hand suggestions, it's meaningless gossip to me.

It’s fair to distrust without evidence; even prudent, I’d say.

 

You don’t have the same trust in Ben that I have. And that’s fair.

 

But realize that this has been a community for a couple of decades now (migrated over three sites). There are posters who trust another’s word without explanation because it has been earned.

 

That doesn’t mean you need to trust it yourself but others will and for good reason.

[PseudoSABR]

 

But realize that this has been a community for a couple of decades now (migrated over three sites). There are posters who trust another’s word without explanation because it has been earned.

As an aside, as far as the inter realms go, this is a cool thing, and I look forward to the next couple of decades arguing with you saps, err trusted friends. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

As an aside, as far as the inter realms go, this is a cool thing, and I look forward to the next couple of decades arguing with you saps, err trusted friends. 

Indeed. It's kind of amazing, isn't it? I don't know any other communities out there that have posters still arguing with one another after two decades.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Indeed. It's kind of amazing, isn't it? I don't know any other communities out there that have posters still arguing with one another after two decades.

And that our origin story is ESPN? Jesus, give me another. I left ESPN for DTFC when I found it, and actually learned about BYTO from a fantasy league I was in from my ESPN days.  But all roads lead here.  It's also interesting to see us all grow. I was college aged when I first encountered the ESPN community and here I am post 40. (I actually worry about keeping track of you all (even Levi).)

[Squirrel]

And that our origin story is ESPN? Jesus, give me another. I left ESPN for DTFC when I found it, and actually learned about BYTO from a fantasy league I was in from my ESPN days.  But all roads lead here.  It's also interesting to see us all grow. I was college aged when I first encountered the ESPN community and here I am post 40. (I actually worry about keeping track of you all (even Levi).)

Lol, I was already ‘old’ when I started lurking on the ESPN boards and then BYTO. It’s been a pleasure watching you all grow up!