All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[4saken1]

That’s damning for the idea that if moderates are out they will build a majority.

Yes, actually, it is. Nevada very well may have been a game changer. One could argue that it's just one state, but his polling in Nevada surged quite dramatically in the past couple of weeks. Bernie's results in Iowa and New Hampshire have more people considering him to be a serious contender. California will cement that if none of the moderates drop out before then. I imagine this win will boost his already considerable margin here over other candidates, though. Being that his position in California was already 'strong' (30ish% in polls), he might even get into the 40% range, putting him out of reach even if a couple of the moderates drop out before then.

[PaulBullion]

It seems you are trying to counter facts with non sequiturs.

It seems you traded in your sense of humor for haughtiness.

[The Overlord]

It seems you traded in your sense of humor for haughtiness.

Say something funny and I may actually find it humorous.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

My methodology is actually betting that out of all the candidates (except Bloomberg), more Democrats will stay home on Election Day if Sanders is the candidate than if any other one wins the nomination. If you look at who the most hated candidate is (again, except Bloomberg), it has to be Sanders. There's that sect of his followers that has **** on literally every candidate and yet gets supremely butthurt (like Trump supporters) whenever anything bad is said about Saint Bernie. These are the same people who continued to campaign against Hillary (and still do) right up until the Election, then either stayed home or voted for Trump. So many people have misplaced hatred of Sanders because of this and are still bitter. I AM! I will vote for Sanders if he is the candidate no matter what, but I think that there are many who will not despite saying that they are 'blue no matter who'. Your polls cannot factor in how many people say that they will vote for Bernie on Election Day, but when that day comes, they get a sick feeling in their stomach at the thought of voting for him and just say "Nah, one vote isn't really going to matter"!

I think it's interesting how on the one hand, however, we have all of these polls before the 2016 Election showing that Hillary was supposed to beat Trump (actually, aside from a few like 538, most of the polls were based on popular vote and not EC, so they were actually 'right') and Sanders use these to show how bad and inaccurate polls are. But when it comes to the polls that show that Sanders does better in a head to head against Trump by a larger margin than other candidates, they are the holy grail of accuracy. How are these polls conducted? Do they go state by state counting likely delegates, or are they assuming the popular vote will win the Election?

Then your methodology is based on an assumption that goes against most data we have. Also statistically, Sanders voters are the ones more likely to bail if they don’t get their candidate because they come from demographics that traditionally only vote when mobilized.

If Sanders is the most hated, he wouldn’t be winning head to heads with everyone and killing every candidate in favor ability and trustworthiness polls.

Again more bad data. Sanders got more of his supporters to vote for Hillary than she got for Obama. That’s just a fact. If they are bitter over that, it’s misplaced bitterness based off incorrect information.

Oh and that last bit of data is based on what actually happened, not pre election polls.

You got it right on the second examination. The polls were correct. She comfortably won the popular vote and lost in states she was within the margin of error which were trending poorly after the Comey letter (btw blame the Comey letter and former Obama voters who didn’t support her in those midwestern states, because that’s factually where she lost)

Polling is usually pretty accurate when you use the standard scientific models. The polls were correct in 2016. Most Americans just don’t know what they mean. She won the popular vote. Her problem was that once you got her in the Marvin of error she was in territory where all her trends were weak and it was very possible Trump could win. Basically most intelligent pollsters gave Trump a path he just really needed to do well in key areas and he did.

So yeah most polls are pretty accurate. You just have to adjust for trends. Things change to. If Comey’s letter isn’t released, Hillary wins.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I don't think we know which one is "more" and we probably won't until we have the final race starting. I know you cite more Hillary voters are willing to switch than Bernie and that statistic has some merit in this discussion, but it's not quite apples to apples. In fact, I'd argue, that's precisely the problem.

To win, Bernie is going to have to get those previous Obama voters who went for Trump and the 2018 converts to come to his side. Plus drive out previous non-voters. And he'll have to because there will be willing Democrats, many independents, Never Trumpers, and other assorted Republican groups (Mormons for example) who might be willing to vote for Biden or Bloomberg or Buttigieg or Klobuchar but will simply not vote for Bernie. I don't know how many they number, but here is a quick anecdote:

I live in Arizona. On their top news station (KTAR) they portray themselves as independents but are really conservative in nature. Nearly every day they spend mocking Bernie's socialism and how it will cost Mark Kelly a Senate spot. They go after Bernie nearly every day and lament the chance for Arizona to be a true swing state. Now, I'm not saying anything positive about those arguments, only pointing out they exist. Mormons here in AZ are dead set against Bernie as well. Now, I like Bernie's hispanic numbers and that could really do well for him so I'm not writing off Arizona. I'm just pointing out the opposition that exists. A week or so ago when you set your pants on fire when I was pointing out the need to see more turnout, more young voters, more hispanic, more first timers, etc......it's because that will be absolutely necessary to win. Nevada was a good step in that direction.

I think it’s hard to predict anything until the race manifests. In recent memory, Democrats only know how to win with an Obama coalition. The issue is they think that equals a moderate. I can tell you right now, Biden is the closest and he isn’t bringing the entire Obama coalition. Pete is a young moderate, and he is nowhere tapping into that.

I tend to think on the Democrat side, people fall in love with personalities and that’s Bernie’s strength

[PwrdOn]

I just don't understand these "Bernie can't win" arguments when the rest of the field is just so weak. Sure, a hypothetical moderate candidate that had a strong base of devoted followers and a set of sensible policies that could appeal to a broad and diverse coalition would certainly stand a better chance of beating Trump in the general. However, the more I think about, the more it sort of dawns on me that not only does such a candidate not exist, that perhaps this sort of West Wing president CAN'T exist in reality, because the reality of what voters care about and what types of leaders they respect doesn't match the Hollywood conception. Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, and all the rest simply don't measure up to what their campaigns want you to think they are, and voters are not so clueless as to miss that. On the other hand, agree with him or not, everyone knows exactly who Bernie is and what he stands for, and this has at least earned him a degree of grudging respect from his enemies.

[4saken1]

The 14th Amendment says states that infringe the vote must lose representation in Congress. It’s time to make this happen.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Obviously, there are problems with the wording of it and how it would be enforced (who decides who is in violation, would representatives lost by one state get reallocated to others, what steps would states need to take to get their representatives back, etc.), but yeah....this should definitely be something that we do to get certain states in line!

[Theleviathan]

I tend to think on the Democrat side, people fall in love with personalities and that’s Bernie’s strength

I agree with the part I didn't quote, we're going to have to wait and see how things play out.

To this point: I don't think it's just the Democrats. People vote on emotion and right now Bernie is hitting the most emotional chords.

[PwrdOn]

I agree with the part I didn't quote, we're going to have to wait and see how things play out.

To this point: I don't think it's just the Democrats. People vote on emotion and right now Bernie is hitting the most emotional chords.

Yeah but centrists aren't doing anything to counter that messaging. Let the Republicans take care of concern trolling over how we're going to pay for all of Bernie's programs, the other candidates should focus on putting forth concrete proposals for how they'd solve the problems with health care, the environment, student debt, etc. that would be BETTER than what Bernie is proposing. If any of them could make a compelling case for why their plan actually helps MORE people than what Bernie is proposing, then they'd cruise to the nomination and all the Bernie Bros would line up right behind them for the general. The problem is, none of the moderates can do that, because just as with all centrists in every time and place ever, you have NOTHING but empty rhetoric, and we're sick and tired of it.

[Malvolio]

I think someone needs to remind Bernie that if he gets enough delegates to become the nominee, he's going to have to work with the Democratic establishment. I mean, who does he think is organizing the Democratic Convention?

[PwrdOn]

I think someone needs to remind Bernie that if he gets enough delegates to become the nominee, he's going to have to work with the Democratic establishment. I mean, who does he think is organizing the Democratic Convention?

The way you phrased that sounds a tad supervillain-ish though, eh? If he wins the nomination, then the establishment will have to work with HIM because he'd be the face of the party and the one driving turnout for down ticket races, if they choose to sabotage him out of spite the only outcome is that Trump will cruise to victory.

[Theleviathan]

Yeah but centrists aren't doing anything to counter that messaging. Let the Republicans take care of concern trolling over how we're going to pay for all of Bernie's programs, the other candidates should focus on putting forth concrete proposals for how they'd solve the problems with health care, the environment, student debt, etc. that would be BETTER than what Bernie is proposing. If any of them could make a compelling case for why their plan actually helps MORE people than what Bernie is proposing, then they'd cruise to the nomination and all the Bernie Bros would line up right behind them for the general. The problem is, none of the moderates can do that, because just as with all centrists in every time and place ever, you have NOTHING but empty rhetoric, and we're sick and tired of it.

Well, I don't agree with this. I think Bernie has a sizable segment of his support that is a cult of personality. I don't believe that many of them would just line up behind someone else necessarily. Hell, I'd argue Warren's plans have just as much ability to help people and have a much more realistic path to enactment. Yet people are not lining up behind her. In fact, her effort to make a concrete plan that could actually get passed through Congress has been a point of attack on her by Bernie supporters. Elizabeth Warren is the only progressive on that stage whose time in Congress has had real, meaningful change for people. Unfortunately for her, being nuanced and a detailed problem solver is not what voters want regardless of the candidates or the year.

And let's be clear, Bernie has not put forth much of a "concrete plan". He has ideals he hasn't budged on and has laid out a vision for how he wants to help, but he has mostly dodged the plan part of that. I think that's wise from the perspective of winning an election. Candidates who go into specifics and details get hammered by those details. But let's not pretend about what Bernie has actually laid out.

[TriggerWarning]

My methodology is actually betting that out of all the candidates (except Bloomberg), more Democrats will stay home on Election Day if Sanders is the candidate than if any other one wins the nomination. If you look at who the most hated candidate is (again, except Bloomberg), it has to be Sanders. There's that sect of his followers that has **** on literally every candidate and yet gets supremely butthurt (like Trump supporters) whenever anything bad is said about Saint Bernie. These are the same people who continued to campaign against Hillary (and still do) right up until the Election, then either stayed home or voted for Trump. So many people have misplaced hatred of Sanders because of this and are still bitter. I AM! I will vote for Sanders if he is the candidate no matter what, but I think that there are many who will not despite saying that they are 'blue no matter who'. Your polls cannot factor in how many people say that they will vote for Bernie on Election Day, but when that day comes, they get a sick feeling in their stomach at the thought of voting for him and just say "Nah, one vote isn't really going to matter"!

I've never voted republican in my life but I was fully prepared to in 2016 as you would have had to put a gun to my head to vote Hilary Clinton. Then Trump, the one republican I wasn't willing to vote for, got the nomination. So I voted 3rd party.

If its Bernie vs Trump I'm voting 3rd party again.

If its any democrat besides Warren (who I consider Bernie lite) I'm gladly voting for that democrat.

Bernie excites the radical left but those of us in the moderate area see him full of hot air, unfullfillable promises, and a guarantee that Trump wins re-election.

Some like to make the argument that Clinton was a moderate and couldn't win so we have to nominate someone further left. That ignores the fact that Hilary Clinton is one of the most reviled people in politics. Just like with Trump there is no middle ground, you either love em or despise them. She lost votes in a lot of places by people being unwilling to vote for her whereas if it had been someone likable without all the Clinton baggage like Biden had he run then he would have destroyed Trump in a landslide. Biden has his issues, many due to age, but he is a likable person and there isn't the utter hate thing going on with him as there is with Clinton.

[PaulBullion]

Warren up 7 points (to 19) compared the last pre-debate poll, but it's different pollsters so there might also be a house effect. Bloomberg and Sanders trending downward.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tion-6730.html

[4saken1]

Sanders got more of his supporters to vote for Hillary than she got for Obama. That’s just a fact. If they are bitter over that, it’s misplaced bitterness based off incorrect information.

Oh and that last bit of data is based on what actually happened, not pre election polls.

This is true. This is indicative that a populist is more likely to vote for a moderate than vice versa. Yes, Hillary supporters were much worse than Sanders supporters. This is what is worrisome to me about Sanders winning the nomination! I don't think many moderates will vote for Trump like they did McCain, because despite the fact that he was a Republican, McCain was also fairly moderate. I do, however, feel that a large chunk will stay home instead.

Sanders' VP pick will be a big part of this discussion, too! Traditionally, they are chosen as a way to shore up votes in areas that you are weak. Hillary chose Virginia!?! Not sure what demographic Sanders will try to appease, but despite being disliked by many moderates I think choosing a more moderate running mate would be a bad idea to get their support, as this will cause some of his supporters to get extremely butthurt. Not sure how many it would cause to turn away from him, but images of the 2016 Democratic Convention and hearing many of his 'loyalest' supporters booing him and saying "**** you, Bernie" after he had the audacity to endorse Hillary gives me pause. Somebody like Stacey Abrams would dispel the notion that he would be a weak candidate among black voters.