2019 dem primary debates

[VRAMdemon]

President of the United States is one of the single most meaningful, stressful and taxing positions a person can assume. Age and decline of mental and physical faculties are a *REAL* concern here.

If Joe wins the nom. His running mate will be important because of his age. Biden really does have an age problem, and obviously, that's not going to go away.

Joe himself knows - he has a long and complicated senate record, but it's mostly a good one. But, of Harris' assault... There's really no way anyone could argue that he shouldn't have seen it coming. And that's what's surprising : he just sat there and got fucking owned. I can't remember the last time I watched someone of Biden's stature get clobbered like that. It's not really Biden's record on race that was his problem last night; it's that he didn't look like the feisty, unadulterated, "I'm a lawyer but could have been a construction worker," Scranton tough guy that we're all used to seeing. He looked like he was walking around trying to find someone to play bridge with.

The danger that the Democrats face is having to deal with a party that is fractured along the lines of identity politics.

Harris most certainly stood out in the debates. She stood out by insinuating that the party's dominant front-runner may have a racist bone in his body after all. Whether she said those words or meant that doesn't matter - she made Joe Biden, the party's front runner, look weak and put him on the defensive just by having to talk about the issue. To be sure, Biden probably has other problems than just fending off charges of sympathizing with segregationists but that's not the point. The point is, hopefully winning the democratic nomination will not involve beating each other up over who's the real champion for social justice, and that's not a fight Democrats want to carry into the general election. They will get fucking destroyed if that is their cause.

Maybe Biden was more focused on what he thought Sanders would bring? If so he prepped for the wrong fight. She wanted to hit Biden and get a viral debating moment and she got it but frankly without a clear policy of her own, the whole thing is empty political posturing. School segregation still happens to some degree in some states but Harris doesn't appear to have any plan on what she wants to do about it.

 

[Starbuck1975]

If Joe wins the nom. His running mate will be important because of his age. Biden really does have an age problem, and obviously, that's not going to go away.

Joe himself knows - he has a long and complicated senate record, but it's mostly a good one. But, of Harris' assault... There's really no way anyone could argue that he shouldn't have seen it coming. And that's what's surprising : he just sat there and got fucking owned. I can't remember the last time I watched someone of Biden's stature get clobbered like that. It's not really Biden's record on race that was his problem last night; it's that he didn't look like the feisty, unadulterated, "I'm a lawyer but could have been a construction worker," Scranton tough guy that we're all used to seeing. He looked like he was walking around trying to find someone to play bridge with.

The danger that the Democrats face is having to deal with a party that is fractured along the lines of identity politics.

Harris most certainly stood out in the debates. She stood out by insinuating that the party's dominant front-runner may have a racist bone in his body after all. Whether she said those words or meant that doesn't matter - she made Joe Biden, the party's front runner, look weak and put him on the defensive just by having to talk about the issue. To be sure, Biden probably has other problems than just fending off charges of sympathizing with segregationists but that's not the point. The point is, hopefully winning the democratic nomination will not involve beating each other up over who's the real champion for social justice, and that's not a fight Democrats want to carry into the general election. They will get fucking destroyed if that is their cause.

Maybe Biden was more focused on what he thought Sanders would bring? If so he prepped for the wrong fight. She wanted to hit Biden and get a viral debating moment and she got it but frankly without a clear policy of her own, the whole thing is empty political posturing. School segregation still happens to some degree in some states but Harris doesn't appear to have any plan on what she wants to do about it.

Biden had to have known the attack was coming, but there is no good response to it, because in attacking Harris, he risks fracturing the Democrat coalition. I think what surprised him is that she is willing to fracture the party just to preserve her candidacy.

You said it best. To attack Biden without a policy proposal to tackle the very issue that gives her attack teeth...well, its just posturing.

 

[Jhhnn]

Or maybe putting millions of people out of work could be a sticking point as well.

It never bothered GOP Jerb Creators before.

 

[cytg111]

Or maybe putting millions of people out of work could be a sticking point as well.

Bitches, please.

See the whole thing, take notice @9:40. Now tell me again how Trump is doing you favors by taking jobs back from China.

 

[glenn1]

you are so fucked.


Yea cause you can see Trump beating him. Stop pretending.

Or folks who would generally vote GOP but dislike Trump see Mayor Pete as an acceptable candidate. One where maybe not every idea is agreed with but actually has the ability to change minds, like his answer on late-term abortion.

Honestly if the objective was to pick the “easy for Trump to beat” then Buttigieg probably wouldn’t be anywhere close to top pick. Sure he might lose some bigot votes due to being gay but those same folks would likely vote against Harris, Booker, and most of the other candidates too.

 

[Moonbeam]

Buttigieg and Klobochar are from the centrist part of the Democratic party, if they are radical socialists then Bernie Sanders is the reincarnation of Joseph Stalin.

I used the term progressive. You identified that with radical socialism. Two things then: People can use the sane words and inwardly interpret or associate them differently, and 2, people can have differing opinions or internal reactions to the same thing. This can mean in this case that I mean something different than what you hear when I say progressive, and that our placement of a political philosophy as to where it fits on a conservative liberal scale can differ.

Perhaps, to put it in even simpler terms, one person’s opinion can be very nuanced and sophisticated, developed with study and self reflection, and another’s the product of visceral gut feeling and unexamined conditioning.

 

[glenn1]

Buttigieg and Klobochar are from the centrist part of the Democratic party, if they are radical socialists then Bernie Sanders is the reincarnation of Joseph Stalin.

I wouldn’t say that they’re from the centrist part. They might seem that way because Sanders and to a lesser degree Warren want to completely remake the country. Buttigieg and Klobuchar are more “establishment” or progressive incrementalist type politicians. In that they seem to want to improve things but not necessarily tear the country all apart and rebuild it. That’s not the case at all with Sanders and Warren who are running on a platform of widespread structural changes and are rightfully called revolutionary progressives.

Neither approach is necessarily wrong and both have their pros and cons. I think it’s fair to say it’s easier to sell the incremental approach in the general elections but it might not be what the Democrats may be willing to accept right now.

 

[cytg111]

Or folks who would generally vote GOP but dislike Trump see Mayor Pete as an acceptable candidate. One where maybe not every idea is agreed with but actually has the ability to change minds, like his answer on late-term abortion.

Honestly if the objective was to pick the “easy for Trump to beat” then Buttigieg probably wouldn’t be anywhere close to top pick. Sure he might lose some bigot votes due to being gay but those same folks would likely vote against Harris, Booker, and most of the other candidates too.

People who dislike Trump but would vote normal GOP is not turning up for the elections as is .. I think that is a good compromise... What the dems needs is someone that riles up the entirety of the dem base that would maybe normally pass on an election, that means 1. dem women at the sight of a women president and 2. the brown vote, all those who turned out for Obama will turn out for Harris as well.
I like Pete too. A lot actually. It is just not his time to run.
IMO.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Yea cause you can see Trump beating him. Stop pretending.

Of all the candidates I've watched he seemed to be one the most articulate, didn't resort to petty political bickering, and sensible. A country tired of Trump's theatrics isn't going to gravitate toward more of the same from Harris, nor is the center (which winning will require their votes) be moved by Bernie's call for revolution by the far left. Mayor Pete may be one of the few who could beat Trump, but there's still lots of time for all this to play out.

Also again the tendency on this forum is to dismiss what I say as pretending or trolling etc. Sorry my opinions don't align with yours, but that doesn't mean they aren't genuine. I'd love to discuss what I saw of the candidates and my opinions of them and how this will play out, but that's difficult if whatever I say is simply countered with "nah you're lying.."

 

[cytg111]

Of all the candidates I've watched he seemed to be one the most articulate, didn't resort to petty political bickering, and sensible. A country tired of Trump's theatrics isn't going to gravitate toward more of the same from Harris, nor is the center (which winning will require their votes) be moved by Bernie's call for revolution by the far left. Mayor Pete may be one of the few who could beat Trump, but there's still lots of time for all this to play out.

Also again the tendency on this forum is to dismiss what I say as pretending or trolling etc. Sorry my opinions don't align with yours, but that doesn't mean they aren't genuine. I'd love to discuss what I saw of the candidates and my opinions of them and how this will play out, but that's difficult if whatever I say is simply countered with "nah you're lying.."

You just pledged yourself a devoted Trumpist the other day. Nothing you say can be valued as close to semi true.
A Trumpist will lie
A Trumpist will cheat
A Trumpist will distort facts
A Trumpist will make up alternative facts
A Trumpist is a generic anarchist.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Pledged myself as a devoted Trumpist? Show me. I disagree with a lot things he says and does and have posted such on here numerous times, the devoted Trumpists I know fall in line and lie to themselves and their principles to defend everything he does . Hell I disagree with probably his two biggest policies which is building a physical border was (*edit: wall) and the tax cuts. It seems like you don’t really know me that well.

 

[brandonbull]

Pledged myself as a devoted Trumpist? Show me. I disagree with a lot things he says and does and have posted such on here numerous times, the devoted Trumpists I know fall in line and lie to themselves and their principles to defend everything he does . Hell I disagree with probably his two biggest policies which is building a physical border was and the tax cuts. It seems like you don’t really know me that well.

I hope you don't tell us that you really don't like long walks on the beach. If that's true, mind blown.

 

[Commodus]

Pledged myself as a devoted Trumpist? Show me. I disagree with a lot things he says and does and have posted such on here numerous times, the devoted Trumpists I know fall in line and lie to themselves and their principles to defend everything he does . Hell I disagree with probably his two biggest policies which is building a physical border was and the tax cuts. It seems like you don’t really know me that well.

I do think the "Trumpist" allegation is off the mark, but there's also a concern that you're one of those people who decries Trump and Republicans on key issues while simultaneously showing no sign that he'll actually vote against them in 2020. If you want them out, the only acceptable solution is to vote exclusively Democrat in 2020 and to tell everyone you know to do the same. Will you promise to do that?

 

[glenn1]

I do think the "Trumpist" allegation is off the mark, but there's also a concern that you're one of those people who decries Trump and Republicans on key issues while simultaneously showing no sign that he'll actually vote against them in 2020. If you want them out, the only acceptable solution is to vote exclusively Democrat in 2020 and to tell everyone you know to do the same. Will you promise to do that?

Do you want our votes or not? Asking someone to vote straight party ticket because I disagree with the person at the top of the ticket makes no sense. Our vote for senator or representative makes no difference to whether Trump gets reelected or not.

 

[Commodus]

Do you want our votes or not? Asking someone to vote straight party ticket because I disagree with the person at the top of the ticket makes no sense. Our vote for senator or representative makes no difference to whether Trump gets reelected or not.

Keep in mind that it's not just about removing Trump, it's about undoing the damage he's done to democracy, civil rights, the environment, net neutrality and other issues. If a Democrat President wins but Republicans are in charge of at least one side of Congress, many of the things Trump broke will stay broken.

In an ideal situation, you'd be right; you'd vote for whoever represents your state the best. But we're not in an ideal situation. So long as the Republicans are led by corrupt obstructionists, they and Trump are part of the same package.

 

[glenn1]

Keep in mind that it's not just about removing Trump, it's about undoing the damage he's done to democracy, civil rights, the environment, net neutrality and other issues. If a Democrat President wins but Republicans are in charge of at least one side of Congress, many of the things Trump broke will stay broken.

In an ideal situation, you'd be right; you'd vote for whoever represents your state the best. But we're not in an ideal situation. So long as the Republicans are led by corrupt obstructionists, they and Trump are part of the same package.

I’ll give you my opinion and you can take it or leave it I don’t really care. Your best approach for getting Trump voters to vote for a Democrat nominee they would normally oppose is not to insist that they vote straight ticket Democrat. You need to stop after asking them to vote against Trump and accept that they might vote for the Dem for President and still vote for Congress critters that are not Democrats. If you attempt the all or nothing approach then you’ll get nothing, they just won’t vote or will cast a spite vote. I think there’s a lot of Republicans out there that think that Trump was a mistake and are willing to vote to replace him, but aren’t willing to abandon the party wholesale.

Even by mentioning the whole “obstructionist” thing you’re proving that Trump is not really the main thing you care about. If Trump really was your top concern and an existential threat to the country You be perfectly fine with a Dem president and GOP Congress.

 

[IronWing]

Copied from the middle name thread so I can comment.

The "2019" thing hasn't been made in five years.

 

[dank69]

Do you want our votes or not? Asking someone to vote straight party ticket because I disagree with the person at the top of the ticket makes no sense. Our vote for senator or representative makes no difference to whether Trump gets reelected or not.

Republicans have protected Trump and you know it. No I don't want your vote. Vote for the enablers all you want.

 

[glenn1]

Republicans have protected Trump and you know it. No I don't want your vote. Vote for the enablers all you want.

Remember saying this if Trump wins.

 

[dank69]

Remember saying this if Trump wins.

I half want Trump to win. It will be quite satisfying to watch you suffer from all the damage he and the rest of the Republicans can do to you with that much time.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Republicans have protected Trump and you know it. No I don't want your vote. Vote for the enablers all you want.

You’re missing the point. Republicans have protected Trump but that’s not who he’s talking about, not really. There is a large swath of America, myself included, that isn’t a Republican or a Democrat and those people are what it will take to win. Demonizing anyone that doesn’t see your point of view on everything will only lead to loss after loss.

 

[glenn1]

I half want Trump to win. It will be quite satisfying to watch you suffer from all the damage he and the rest of the Republicans can do to you with that much time.

Remember saying that also. I don't think either Trump or a Dem president would make me "suffer" in any way but than you for thinking about my welfare.

 

[glenn1]

You’re missing the point. Republicans have protected Trump but that’s not who he’s talking about, not really. There is a large swath of America, myself included, that isn’t a Republican or a Democrat and those people are what it will take to win. Demonizing anyone that doesn’t see your point of view on everything will only lead to loss after loss.

It might be a lost cause. If they can't have a full-on blue wave election where Dems win huge supermajorities, they'd rather not have our votes. Either vote straight Dem ticket or you're a deplorable and we'd rather you just vote Trump. That's not the strategy I would use when trying to persuade people, but it's their election to win or lose.

 

[soulcougher73]

I voted libertarian the last 2 elections, and overall side more with dems, and never with the GOP on any issue. I also live in a red state (fuck you EC), but since then I’ve voted straight Dem, as the GOP and a Trump have gone off the deep end. Before they were just annoying, but now they are a threat to the country, and even though I’d love to stick to principle, I have to do what I can to eliminate the GOP and I know there is only one real viable option even if I don’t agree with the Dems 100%. The GOP is THAT bad.

 

[dank69]

You’re missing the point. Republicans have protected Trump but that’s not who he’s talking about, not really. There is a large swath of America, myself included, that isn’t a Republican or a Democrat and those people are what it will take to win. Demonizing anyone that doesn’t see your point of view on everything will only lead to loss after loss.

Yup and I'm not going to shed a tear when that large swath of people start feeling the consequences of their stubbornness.