Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
TheCid

2020 Election

Recommended Posts

The Washington Post
The Post Most
 
 
614a82e7f32dae41ecb01a5532d20819-600-0-70-8-YFF222F2DYI6TDUDJZTIP2MYCQ.jpg

(Salwan Georges/The Washington Post)

Biden holds wide lead among black voters in Democratic presidential race, Post-Ipsos poll finds

The survey, one of the most extensive studies to date on the views of African Americans about the 2020 election, finds that defeating President Trump is personally important to an overwhelming majority in that group.

By Scott Clement, Cleve Wootson, Dan Balz and Emily Guskin   Read more »

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheCid said:

While this is a valid issue, but of course we really don't know what Trump's physical condition is.  His mental one is pretty obvious.   If we rule out Sanders, then people will say Biden is too old or in less than perfect health, etc.

At this point, the Democrats have NOT decided that Sanders is the best chance to defeat Trump.

Biden didn't have a heart attack that I am aware of.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

Biden didn't have a heart attack that I am aware of.

No, but he does have a history of aneurysms, and he had a pulmonary embolism after surgery. He also has an irregular heartbeat. Like many age-70+ people, he's on several medications. That whole "bleeding from the eye" thing on TV didn't help matters. 

I'd still vote for him over Trump any day though, if that needs to be stated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bogie56 said:
 
 
 
 

(Salwan Georges/The Washington Post)

Biden holds wide lead among black voters in Democratic presidential race, Post-Ipsos poll finds

The survey, one of the most extensive studies to date on the views of African Americans about the 2020 election, finds that defeating President Trump is personally important to an overwhelming majority in that group.

By Scott Clement, Cleve Wootson, Dan Balz and Emily Guskin   Read more »

This supports my earlier posts regarding the significance of the black vote in S.C. in the Dem Primary in Feb.   And the significance of the S.C. primary in the election process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

USA Today Network's Political Notebook had an interesting summation of the various polls.  Of course, I take polls with a grain of salt.

Iowa: Sanders 20%; Warren-17%; Buttigieg-16%; Biden-15%.

Nevada: Biden-23%; Sanders-17%; Steyer and Warren - 12%.

New Hampshire: Buttigieg-20%; Biden-19%; Sanders-18%; Warren-15%.

South Carolina: Biden-36%; Steyer-15%; Sanders-14%; Warren-10%

Unfortunate that the best qualified Dem is doing so poorly - Amy Klobuchar.  Steyer is spending a lot of money on TV ads in South Carolina.

https://www.pressreader.com/usa/milwaukee-journal-sentinel/20200112/281616717310366

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Steyer is spending a lot of money on TV ads in South Carolina.

Yeah, he's bought a lot of ads here in Florida, as well. Not as many as Bloomberg, though. Bloomberg has ads running at least once every half-hour during the 6-to-8 PM timeslot every day on all major networks. It must be costing him a fortune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Yeah, he's bought a lot of ads here in Florida, as well. Not as many as Bloomberg, though. Bloomberg has ads running at least once every half-hour during the 6-to-8 PM timeslot every day on all major networks. It must be costing him a fortune.

Well, it is good for the local TV stations. Bloomberg has a lot as well, but I think I see more of Steyer's.  He may be focusing more on the S.C. primary in Feb.  Then move emphasis to next state.

Hopefully they will also spend some money on local print media, especially newspapers.  They need the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot more to this article than what I am quoting here.  Velly interesting ...

It’s Bernie’s moment. But it’s Bloomberg’s race.

Opinion   By John Ellis   Read more »

...

If it can be summed up, then, the Democratic “mood” is basically this: “We like Bernie. He’s a warrior. But we’re afraid if we nominate him, he’ll lose in the fall. We need someone to get the job done.”

If the two men who might be that someone — former vice president Joe Biden and former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg — lose to Sanders in Iowa and New Hampshire, that would make their “electability” somewhat less convincing. Defeat can be contagious. There are not many voters who say: “I like him — he loses a lot.”

So it’s Bernie’s moment, which has sent a wave of panic through the Democratic ecosystem. It’s like waking up from a nightmare, only to realize that you’re waking up in a nightmare.

Which helps explain why Democrats across the country will soon find themselves with a newfound appreciation for the virtues of one Mike Bloomberg, former Republican mayor of New York and billionaire founder of a financial data services empire. He might not have been exactly what they had in mind, but by Super Tuesday he’ll look like Brad Pitt.

What people don’t yet seem to have grasped is this: Bloomberg is going to spend an astronomical amount of money on this race. Probably at least $1 billion. Maybe twice that. Possibly even more. Numbers like that upend every model of every presidential race in history. He can buy every news adjacency on cable and local television stations from now until November and not make a dent in his net worth. U.S. politics has never seen such financial throw weight in a presidential campaign.

Look at it from the point of view of the “down ballot” Democratic candidates. If you’re running for the U.S. Senate, or in one of the 100 “competitive” House races, or for governor or state senate, it’s likely that one of Bloomberg’s many super PACs is going to put vast amounts of money behind your campaign with “issues” TV advertising, digital advertising, voter-registration drives and organizational support. Buttressing that will be his national campaign infrastructure, staffed and financed at a level never before seen in presidential politics.

By Election Day, every anti-Trump voter in every precinct will have been contacted repeatedly, and then driven to the polls, if need be. Which will increase Mr. or Ms. Down-Ballot Democratic Candidate’s vote by, what? Two percent? Five percent? Ten percent? It doesn’t matter. It will add untold votes to the D side of the ledger.

....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

Yeah, he's bought a lot of ads here in Florida, as well. Not as many as Bloomberg, though. Bloomberg has ads running at least once every half-hour during the 6-to-8 PM timeslot every day on all major networks. It must be costing him a fortune.

Bloomberg is running a lot of ads here in CA (well at least So Cal, but I assume in San Fran and other metro areas of the state).    

They all attack Trump.    Since these are ads for the Dem primary,   the ads don't really shine any light on why one would vote for Bloomberg over other Dems,  other then the term "experienced" is thrown out a lot.        IF one of the concerns with Sanders and Biden is age,  well Bloomberg was born in 1942 so he is around the same age as those others.

As for Bloomberg willing to spend a lot of money;   that could backfire on progressives.       Kind of difficult to overcome the messaging of billionaires are evil,,,,,  but,  hey,,, vote for OUR billionaire over THEIR billionaire.

With regards to electability;  The MSM tagged Warren as being too-progressive to be electable.     I'm not sure this is really true,  especially when the opponent is Trump.   Warren needs to change this narrative.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2020 at 6:29 PM, LawrenceA said:

News sources have learned that featuring certain people will drive up views and "hate" clicks. Hilary Clinton was a reliable source for accruing "hate clicks", and AOC has since become the prime subject. Greta Thunberg is also a predictable bait for "hate clicks". It's marketing firms manipulating easily-triggered and weak-willed people who react predictably like Pavlov's dogs to the same stimuli over and over again. 

With regards to CNN and click bait:    Well today the biggest world event that is going on,  according to CNN,  is with the British monarch.      5 or more articles about,,, oh,, my,,,, what these silly folks are up to.    AND CNN even uses the term "analysis" as a tag for these articles.     Like there is something of substance here.     Prince denied the Queen!!!      (and I always though she didn't have a lot to say).

I guess there are enough Pavlov's dogs interested in such nonsense to support CNN's decision that this is major "news".

PS:   CNN also re-titled that A.O.C. thread to:  A.O.C. should leave the Dem party.      This is a lot stronger messaging then the past title of "Is A.O.C. a Dem?".

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

With regards to CNN and click bait:    Well today the biggest world event that is going,  according to CNN is with the British monarch.      5 or more articles about,,, oh,, my,,,, what these silly folks are up to.    AND CNN even uses the term "analysis" as a tag for these articles.     Like there is something of substance here.     Prince denied the Queen!!!      (and I always though she didn't have a lot to say).

I guess there are enough Pavlov's dogs interested in such nonsense to support CNN's decision that this is major "news".

Oddly enough, I was on Yahoo's main page before coming here, and I was wondering to myself just how many stories they've posted/linked to this past few days about the royals, a subject that I would be hard pressed to care less about. If all of the stories about the royals, the Kardashians, and people from The Bachelor or Real Housewives shows disappeared, most internet "news" sites would be barren of content.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Bloomberg is running a lot of ads here in CA (well at least So Cal, but I assume in San Fran and other metro areas of the state).    

They all attack Trump.    Since these are ads for the Dem primary,   the ads don't really shine any light on why one would vote for Bloomberg over other Dems,  other then the term "experienced" is thrown out a lot.        IF one of the concerns with Sanders and Biden is age,  well Bloomberg was born in 1942 so he is around the same age as those others.

As for Bloomberg willing to spend a lot of money;   that could backfire on progressives.       Kind of difficult to overcome the messaging of billionaires are evil,,,,,  but,  hey,,, vote for OUR billionaire over THEIR billionaire.

With regards to electability;  The MSM tagged Warren as being too-progressive to be electable.     I'm not sure this is really true,  especially when the opponent is Trump.   Warren needs to change this narrative.  

When Trump reneged on the Paris Climate Accord Bloomberg stepped up and personally covered the millions that the U.S. was supposed to pay into the kitty.  When the time comes I think he can look progressive enough while still appealing to moderates.  And he's not a phoney like Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

When Trump reneged on the Paris Climate Accord Bloomberg stepped up and personally covered the millions that the U.S. was supposed to pay into the kitty.  When the time comes I think he can look progressive enough while still appealing to moderates.  And he's not a phoney like Trump.

This is the same topic we have been covering for a while;  after the Dem primary is over,   can the Dem candidate rally the troops and get Obama type voter turnout? 

I admit to being more cynical about this than you and man do I hope I'm wrong. 

E.g.   Black Lives Matter held protest here in So Cal \ Los Angeles,   against Mayor Pete.     The L.A. mayor just endorsed Biden.   The local branch of that group will be holding protests against Biden as well criticizing the L.A. mayor's decision.     

Hopefully all of these concerns (either by progressives that the candidate is too-moderate or vise versa),  will be forgotten in November and Dems will come out in record numbers to defeat Trump.      As you noted this isn't 2016 AND those fools that sat at home thinking it didn't matter if a person like Trump was President of the USA,  have seen the light.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

This is the same topic we have been covering for a while;  after the Dem primary is over,   can the Dem candidate rally the troops and get Obama type voter turnout? 

I admit to being more cynical about this than you and man do I hope I'm wrong. 

E.g.   Black Lives Matter held protest here in So Cal \ Los Angeles,   against Mayor Pete.     The L.A. mayor just endorsed Biden.   The local branch of that group will be holding protest against Biden as well criticizing the mayor's decision.     

Hopefully all of these concerns (either by progressives that the candidate is too-moderate or vise versa),  will be forgotten in November and Dems will come out in record numbers to defeat Trump.      As you noted this isn't 2016 AND those fools that sat at home thinking it didn't matter if a person like Trump was President of the USA,  have seen the light.

 

 

 

Many New York City mayors have run for president and none has won.  Maybe Bloomberg will be different.  At this point, he hasn't done anything to give me a reason to vote for him.  Maybe his messaging will improve in the future, but right now he is just another billionaire trying to buy the White House - like Trump.

I'll admit after 2016 and many of the 2018 state wide races I am pessimistic for the Dems pulling this out.  Hope I am wrong, but I have seen too many good Dem candidates for president lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, TheCid said:

Many New York City mayors have run for president and none has won.  Maybe Bloomberg will be different.  At this point, he hasn't done anything to give me a reason to vote for him.  Maybe his messaging will improve in the future, but right now he is just another billionaire trying to buy the White House - like Trump.

I'll admit after 2016 and many of the 2018 state wide races I am pessimistic for the Dems pulling this out.  Hope I am wrong, but I have seen too many good Dem candidates for president lose.

Deleted (I now see you say "'maybe").

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

How will Bloomberg be different?    

 

Bloomberg ain't Trump.  For starters he gave 6 million to the Paris Climate Accord.

And he's eloquent.  His speech at the Democrat Convention in 2016 was terrific.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Bogie56 said:

Bloomberg ain't Trump.  For starters he gave 6 million to the Paris Climate Accord.

And he's eloquent.  His speech at the Democrat Convention in 2016 was terrific.

Uh,  the point was that Bloomberg might have a different outcome than prior New York Mayors.       Last time I checked Trump was only the NY Mayor in his own mind!

Anyhow,   first Bloomberg has to win the Dem primary and despite all of his own money he is willing to spend may have a hard time unwinding his prior history.   (he is the 16th most richest person in the world and that fact might cancel out the influence of his massive spending with many Dem voters).

You focus on his recent history (which has a lot of positives as you noted),   but to win the NY Mayor contest he switched to the GOP.    He did this because he was viewed as too moderate to win the Dem primary.    This kind of made him look like a carpetbagger.        As Mayor he also change the term-limit for the office which allowed him to have 3 consecutive terms (running as an independent the last term, which made him look like an opportunists).     

The good thing for Bloomberg is that Sanders also carries a similar carpetbagger odor,  and that most American voters have short-term memory.

Just to ensure clarity;   I'm for ANYONE but Trump so if the Dem nominee is Bloomberg,   I'm for him by default.      The issue for me at this time,  in this thread titled 2020 Election,   is who will win the Dem primary.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Uh,  the point was that Bloomberg might have a different outcome than prior New York Mayors.       Last time I checked Trump was only the NY Mayor in his own mind!

Anyhow,   first Bloomberg has to win the Dem primary and despite all of his own money he is willing to spend may have a hard time unwinding his prior history.   (he is the 16th most richest person in the world and that fact might cancel out the influence of his massive spending with many Dem voters).

You focus on his recent history (which has a lot of positives as you noted),   but to win the NY Mayor contest he switched to the GOP.    He did this because he was viewed as too moderate to win the Dem primary.    This kind of made him look like a carpetbagger.        As Mayor he also change the term-limit for the office which allowed him to have 3 consecutive terms (running as an independent the last term, which made him look like an opportunists).     

The good thing for Bloomberg is that Sanders also carries a similar carpetbagger odor,  and that most American voters have short-term memory.

Just to ensure clarity;   I'm for ANYONE but Trump so if the Dem nominee is Bloomberg,   I'm for him by default.      The issue for me at this time,  in this thread titled 2020 Election,   is who will win the Dem primary.

 

The stench of stop-and-frisk will be with Bloomberg for a long time.

Plus, it's coming out about his decades-long misogynist behavior and attitude toward women in general and particularly those who worked for him.

I would say as a Democratic candidate,

he's DOA-- no matter how rich he is.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Princess of Tap said:

The stench of stop-and-frisk will be with Bloomberg for a long time.

Plus, it's coming out about his decades-long misogynist behavior and attitude toward women in general and particularly those who worked for him.

I would say as a Democratic candidate,

he's DOA-- no matter how rich he is.

Well you're one American voter that doesn't suffer from short-term memory.     Some appear to only focus on what Bloomberg has done as a private citizen in the last few years and not what he did while in office.     Now his ads do focus on some of the things he has done in office;   E.g.  the one running often in So Cal start with Trump saying he would dismantle and cripple Obamacare.   Then a nurse comes on saying how Bloomberg provide health insurance to millions in the city as Mayor  (of course that was years before Obamacare,,,, but,,,the point is still made;  he cares!).    

For Bloomberg to win the Dem primary in a party that has moved-left,,,,  a majority of Dem primary voters will have to have a short-term memory.      AND if he is the Dem nominee will people-of-color come out and vote for him on election day?      Stop-and-frisk doesn't go over well in the community.       Even support from Obama might not be able to unwind that.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Uh,  the point was that Bloomberg might have a different outcome than prior New York Mayors.     

 

Thank you for understanding my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Uh,  the point was that Bloomberg might have a different outcome than prior New York Mayors.       Last time I checked Trump was only the NY Mayor in his own mind!

 

I understood TheCid's point and i thought that your point was that Bllomberg's fate might be different than prior New York Mayors.  I was just giving some reasons why I thought that might be the case.  Not comparing him to said mayors or Trump - just their fate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bogie56 said:

I understood TheCid's point and i thought that your point was that Bllomberg's fate might be different than prior New York Mayors.  I was just giving some reasons why I thought that might be the case.  Not comparing him to said mayors or Trump - just their fate.

My main goal there  was to make a crack about Trump and his inflated ego.     It was my understanding one can't make too many of those at this forum  (ha ha). 

Anyhow,  did you see Princess' points about Bloomberg?       That there is some substance worth discussing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t Take the Bait,

Progressive Leaders Warn, After Sanders-Warren Spat Overtakes the News Cycle -

 

........ Several progressive leaders and groups — some who’ve endorsed Warren, some who back Sanders, and some who’ve yet to endorse either candidate — strongly disagreed. In conversations with The Intercept, they called for a truce, insisting that a slugfest between Warren and Sanders, less than a month before the Iowa caucuses, only helps the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Leaders from MoveOn, the Working Families Party, Justice Democrats, Democracy for America, the Center for Popular Democracy Action, Sunrise Movement, and Indivisible all called on the two candidates to cease attacking each other and focus on the issues. ......

 

“These new hostilities have been needled and fostered by people who want to maintain control in this current system. It’s the age-old ruling-class strategy of divide and conquer,” said labor leader Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA.

“The only way the people win is through solidarity. So stop beating up on each other, figure out how to find common ground, and get back to talking about the issues that matter, like health care, the dignity of all work, and the existential threat of climate crisis.”

....... “Infighting between Sanders and Warren only benefits big oil, fossil fuel billionaires, the GOP, and the moderate wing of the Democratic Party.” ........

https://theintercept.com/2020/01/14/sanders-warren-feud/

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

Don’t Take the Bait,

Progressive Leaders Warn, After Sanders-Warren Spat Overtakes the News Cycle -

 

........ Several progressive leaders and groups — some who’ve endorsed Warren, some who back Sanders, and some who’ve yet to endorse either candidate — strongly disagreed. In conversations with The Intercept, they called for a truce, insisting that a slugfest between Warren and Sanders, less than a month before the Iowa caucuses, only helps the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. Leaders from MoveOn, the Working Families Party, Justice Democrats, Democracy for America, the Center for Popular Democracy Action, Sunrise Movement, and Indivisible all called on the two candidates to cease attacking each other and focus on the issues. ......

 

“These new hostilities have been needled and fostered by people who want to maintain control in this current system. It’s the age-old ruling-class strategy of divide and conquer,” said labor leader Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA.

“The only way the people win is through solidarity. So stop beating up on each other, figure out how to find common ground, and get back to talking about the issues that matter, like health care, the dignity of all work, and the existential threat of climate crisis.”

....... “Infighting between Sanders and Warren only benefits big oil, fossil fuel billionaires, the GOP, and the moderate wing of the Democratic Party.” ........

 

Sound advise.     But I do wonder why these same progressive are not providing similar advise to their followers when it comes to attacking the "age-old ruling-class" Dem nominees like Biden,  or moderates like Mayor Pete.

I.e. that last sentence could be re-worded as:  “Infighting between Dem progressives and moderates only benefits big oil, fossil fuel billionaires, the GOP, and Trump.” 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...