Break Glass - 2020 USA Elections

1222325272848

Comments

  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    Rossweisse wrote: »
    I don't understand why anyone seriously interested in ousting Donald "Nasty, nasty" Trump would support Crazy Uncle Bernie or Elizabeth "I have a plan for that" Warren; both are too old and, more importantly, too far to the left for most voters. (They are much too far left for me, but I will vote for the Democratic nominee regardless; the future of the Republic depends on getting Trump out of the White House.)

    Biden is rather dim, a serial plagiarist (I loathe plagiarism), and too old - but I'll vote for him if it comes down to that, because I'm desperate to get that orange sociopath out of the White House.

    Biden is completely out of touch. The "No Malarkey" campaign sounds like it's being run by someone living in Mayberry. I'll vote for him in November if he's the nominee, but I'm not going to vote in the primary based on what I think other people might like. I'm going to vote for whoever closest represents my values, which right now looks like Warren or Sanders.
  • As a non-American, I always get a crooked grin and a shake of the head when I read or hear Sanders or Warren described as "too left" or socialists, running around quoting Lenin and Mao. Either one would be comfortable in Canada's Liberal Party's kinda-leftish wing. I guess that it's testament to how successful Reagan was in redefining the political landscape.
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    RE: The No Malarkey slogan--goes to show just how much out of touch Joe really is.

    It's a callback to Biden's use of the term during the 2012 vice presidential debate with Paul Ryan. I'm guessing it's meant to appeal to the kind of folks who are nostalgic for the Obama years and who watch vice presidential debates, which is a pretty good summary of what the Biden campaign is about. Whether this counts as "out of touch" I leave to the judgment of others.

    As a bit of fun, here's a comparison of the use of "malarkey" (with an 'e') versus "malarky" (without an 'e'). The popularity of the former seems tied to Joe Biden's presence in the Senate.
  • As a non-American, I always get a crooked grin and a shake of the head when I read or hear Sanders or Warren described as "too left" or socialists, running around quoting Lenin and Mao. Either one would be comfortable in Canada's Liberal Party's kinda-leftish wing. I guess that it's testament to how successful Reagan was in redefining the political landscape.

    Ummm...that was around before Reagan.
  • Ruth wrote: »
    The "No Malarkey" campaign sounds like it's being run by someone living in Mayberry.
    Careful there. I like to think that someone living in Mayberry could do much better than "No Malarkey."

  • Heck, even Barney Fife could do better!
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    If one were conspiracy-minded, one might almost suspect Uncle Joe of trying to throw the fight. God, how I wish he weren't running.
  • Ohher--

    For a moment, I thought you meant Joseph Stalin. Some people called him that.

    I wonder if he would approve of Russian meddling?
  • I am old, and Joe is to old for me. If push comes to shove I will hold my nose and vote for him.
  • Golden Key wrote: »
    As a non-American, I always get a crooked grin and a shake of the head when I read or hear Sanders or Warren described as "too left" or socialists, running around quoting Lenin and Mao. Either one would be comfortable in Canada's Liberal Party's kinda-leftish wing. I guess that it's testament to how successful Reagan was in redefining the political landscape.

    Ummm...that was around before Reagan.

    The attitude was definitely there pre-Reagan, but it was his presidency that picked the US up by the scruff and threw it to the Right, especially amongst the youth. I saw it with my own eyes on campuses in the early '80s. When an attitude became the fulcrum moved.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    God. Looks like Joe has the makings of a Democratic Trump. Are we really going to put another angry old white guy on the throne Congress seems to be creating?
  • There's always a place for an angry old man, with his fist in the air and his head in the sand,
  • Simon Toad--

    Sounds like that's from a song or poem?
  • Re. Joe Biden's poll standings: do people here expect Democratic voters to be more astute than Republican voters were in the last Republican primary? It seems to me like it's a safe assumption that the two groups are roughly equivalent as to the depth of understanding they apply when making their choices. The only big difference I can think of is that (as far as I know) the left has nothing equivalent to the Fox News / conservative propaganda media network.
  • GK - One of the old Billy Joel's best songs, IMHO. "Angry Young Man" suitably doctored.
  • W Hyatt wrote: »
    Re. Joe Biden's poll standings: do people here expect Democratic voters to be more astute than Republican voters were in the last Republican primary? It seems to me like it's a safe assumption that the two groups are roughly equivalent as to the depth of understanding they apply when making their choices. The only big difference I can think of is that (as far as I know) the left has nothing equivalent to the Fox News / conservative propaganda media network.

    I think I do, actually, but mostly because Trump will be causing a bit more focus from left and centrist leaning voters.
  • Hypothetical arising from @Crœsos comment in Last Secretary Standing:

    Obama made a campaign promise to retain one Republican in his Cabinet. If the Democratic nominee made the same promise today, who would you advise them to retain from the Trump Cabinet?
  • Is Obama's Republican still in office? I've lost track of names, and comings and goings.

    Thx.
  • It was the defence secretary I think, under Bush and then Obama. Croesos reckoned he left during O's first term.
  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    The Democratic nominee shouldn't make such a promise. Obama's ideas about working with Republicans were a pipe dream.
  • 270towin.com has introduced a Democratic Delegate Calculator in the lead up to the Nominating Convention. It is still in it's early stage, and 270towin indicates they will be making it more interactive as time goes on. However, at this stage they are saying while Biden may have around 1377, his opponents will have 1,294. The candidate will need 1,990 to be nominated.

    In other words, it looks like we will have a split convention, the likes of which we have not seen since Teddy Kennedy and Jimmy Carter squared off in 1980.

    The only way around this, as I see it, is Biden offers the VP nomination to Warren.

  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Ruth wrote: »
    The Democratic nominee shouldn't make such a promise. Obama's ideas about working with Republicans were a pipe dream.

    Right on every conceivable count.

    1. There are NO current cabinet members with the right experience, credentials, ideology, training, background, brains, or skills to serve in any branch, department, agency, or service at any level of government in the US.

    2. As "working with Republicans" currently appears to require lying through one's teeth, abusing one's oath of office, abusing one's staff, defrauding American taxpayers, robbing American voters of their franchise, and booking permanent passage on a cruise ship plying that famous river in Egypt, the phrase "working with Republicans" should be wiped from the political lexicon.

  • Ohher wrote: »
    Ruth wrote: »
    The Democratic nominee shouldn't make such a promise. Obama's ideas about working with Republicans were a pipe dream.

    Right on every conceivable count.

    1. There are NO current cabinet members with the right experience, credentials, ideology, training, background, brains, or skills to serve in any branch, department, agency, or service at any level of government in the US.

    2. As "working with Republicans" currently appears to require lying through one's teeth, abusing one's oath of office, abusing one's staff, defrauding American taxpayers, robbing American voters of their franchise, and booking permanent passage on a cruise ship plying that famous river in Egypt, the phrase "working with Republicans" should be wiped from the political lexicon.

    This week, in spite of all the impeachment talk, the Democrats passed the enabling legislation for the new North American Trade Pact.

    The point is, in order for our government to move forward, both parties have to work with each other in spite of major differences.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Fine; show a single recent instance of a Senate Republican lifting a finger to move forward on any of the bills sent by the House and now gathering dust on Mitch McConnel's desk.
  • I was going to say the bloke who quit the party, but he's in the house...

    I was thinking Elaine Chao might be one to keep on if you had to.
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    I was thinking Elaine Chao might be one to keep on if you had to.

    Well, I guess someone in the family will need a job when Ms. Chao's husband loses his.
    :mrgreen:

  • RuthRuth Admin Emeritus
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    270towin.com has introduced a Democratic Delegate Calculator in the lead up to the Nominating Convention. It is still in it's early stage, and 270towin indicates they will be making it more interactive as time goes on. However, at this stage they are saying while Biden may have around 1377, his opponents will have 1,294. The candidate will need 1,990 to be nominated.

    In other words, it looks like we will have a split convention, the likes of which we have not seen since Teddy Kennedy and Jimmy Carter squared off in 1980.

    The only way around this, as I see it, is Biden offers the VP nomination to Warren.

    That's not at all what this calculator shows. 270towin.org is saying current polling data would translate into X number of delegates, and there are multiple states for which they show no polling! Not a single vote has yet been cast, and a little polling data in December does not equal votes cast in caucuses and primaries for several months next year. There's still lots of time for things to change, and they will. Candidates will drop out before voting starts. Others will drop out after poor showings in early voting.

    At this point 12 years ago, Clinton stood at 45% in the polls, Obama at 27%, and Edwards at 15%. Edwards imploded, Obama exploded, and Clinton became Secretary of State. 45% for Clinton and 42% for her opponents in December 2007 didn't yield a split convention in 2008.
  • Ohher wrote: »
    Ruth wrote: »
    The Democratic nominee shouldn't make such a promise. Obama's ideas about working with Republicans were a pipe dream.

    Right on every conceivable count.

    1. There are NO current cabinet members with the right experience, credentials, ideology, training, background, brains, or skills to serve in any branch, department, agency, or service at any level of government in the US.

    2. As "working with Republicans" currently appears to require lying through one's teeth, abusing one's oath of office, abusing one's staff, defrauding American taxpayers, robbing American voters of their franchise, and booking permanent passage on a cruise ship plying that famous river in Egypt, the phrase "working with Republicans" should be wiped from the political lexicon.

    This week, in spite of all the impeachment talk, the Democrats passed the enabling legislation for the new North American Trade Pact.

    The point is, in order for our government t
    Ohher wrote: »
    Fine; show a single recent instance of a Senate Republican lifting a finger to move forward on any of the bills sent by the House and now gathering dust on Mitch McConnel's desk.



    H.R. 5277: To amend section 442 of title 18, United States Code, to exempt certain interests in mutual funds, unit investment trusts, employee benefit plans, and retirement plans from conflict of interest limitations for the Government Publishing Office.
    Type: ENACTED — SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT Date: Dec 5, 2019
    Last Action: Signed by President.

    Explanation: This bill was enacted after being signed by the President on December 5, 2019.


    S. 2710: A bill to prohibit the commercial export of covered munitions items to the Hong Kong Police Force.
    Type: ENACTED — SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENTDate: Nov 27, 2019
    Last Action: Signed by President.

    Explanation: This bill was enacted after being signed by the President on November 27, 2019.


    H.R. 4258: Reauthorizing Security for Supreme Court Justices Act of 2019
    Type: ENACTED — SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT Date: Nov 27, 2019
    Last Action: Signed by President.

    Explanation: This bill was enacted after being signed by the President on November 27, 2019.


    H.R. 3889: ONDCP Technical Corrections Act of 2019
    Type: ENACTED — SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT Date: Nov 27, 2019
    Last Action: Signed by President.

    Explanation: This bill was enacted after being signed by the President on November 27, 2019.


    S. 1838: Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019
    Type: ENACTED — SIGNED BY THE PRESIDENT Date: Nov 27, 2019
    Last Action: Signed by President.

    Explanation: This bill was enacted after being signed by the President on November 27, 2019.

    These bills were all examples of the Democratic House working with the Republican Senate to get things done

    If you want still more examples: https://www.govtrack.us/events/enacted-bills
  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    This week, in spite of all the impeachment talk, the Democrats passed the enabling legislation for the new North American Trade Pact.

    I'm not sure this is going to make that much of a difference in the 2020 presidential election. The idea that you can derail a sitting president's re-election chances by legislatively obstructing his agenda in the last two years of his first term would seem to have been definitively disproven by the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012.
  • Today is the day the list of participants in the December Democratic presidential debate will be finalized. In order to qualify a candidate has to receive at least 200,000 donations from unique donors and poll at least 4% support in four recognized national or early state polls or at least 6% in two early state polls. It's still technically possible for someone to qualify today, but at least one favorable poll would have to drop before midnight (Eastern Time) in order for that to happen so the list is pretty much set.

    The seven qualifiers for the December debates is the smallest number of qualifying candidates in the 2020 Democratic Presidential Debates so far. Missing from the stage will be Kamala Harris, who has withdrawn, and Cory Booker and Tulsi Gabbard, who failed to meet the polled support requirement.

    The Debatables
    • Joe Biden
    • Pete Buttigieg
    • Amy Klobuchar
    • Bernie Sanders
    • Tom Steyer
    • Elizabeth Warren
    • Andrew Yang

    There was one candidate who qualified by number of donors but fell short in by one qualifying poll.

    Almost But Not Quite
    • Tulsi Gabbard

    Technically Gabbard could still make it if a qualified poll showing at least 4% support, either nationally or in an early state, were to be released before midnight tonight (Eastern Standard Time) though Gabbard said a few days ago that even if she were to qualify she would not paricipate.

    Short of the Mark
    • Michael Bloomberg
    • Cory Booker
    • Julián Castro

    Booker and Castro had enough donor support to qualify but have no qualified polls showing 4% support or more. Bloomberg has 2 polls showing support of at least 4% but falls short of the donor threshold. This is the first debate Booker has failed to qualify for and the second for Castro. Latecomer Bloomberg has never qualified for a debate.

    And then there were those who didn't qualify by either polled support or number of donors.

    Not Even Close
    • Michael Bennet
    • John Delaney
    • Deval Patrick
    • Marianne Williamson

    No one on the list above has qualified for a debate since the second one back in late July. The Not Even Close list is shorter than last time because several of them have dropped out, though Deval Patrick is a new addition.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    edited December 2019
    Crœsos wrote: »
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    This week, in spite of all the impeachment talk, the Democrats passed the enabling legislation for the new North American Trade Pact.

    I'm not sure this is going to make that much of a difference in the 2020 presidential election. The idea that you can derail a sitting president's re-election chances by legislatively obstructing his agenda in the last two years of his first term would seem to have been definitively disproven by the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012.

    My response was to the complaint that the Democrats could not work with the Republicans to get bills passed.
    The Debatables
    Joe Biden
    Pete Buttigieg
    Amy Klobuchar
    Bernie Sanders
    Tom Steyer
    Elizabeth Warren
    Andrew Yang

    Four boomers against three Gen X. Let's get the boomers out of there.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Gramps49 wrote: »
    Joe Biden
    Pete Buttigieg
    Amy Klobuchar
    Bernie Sanders
    Tom Steyer
    Elizabeth Warren
    Andrew Yang

    Four boomers against three Gen X. Let's get the boomers out of there.
    I find it peculiar to complain that the boomers are destroying the futures of the younger generations when the two people with the most radical agenda are both boomers.

  • Gramps49 wrote: »
    The Debatables
    Joe Biden (B)
    Pete Buttigieg (M)
    Amy Klobuchar (B)
    Bernie Sanders (B)
    Tom Steyer (B)
    Elizabeth Warren (B)
    Andrew Yang (X)

    Four boomers against three Gen X. Let's get the boomers out of there.

    I count five Boomers (born 1946-1964), one Gen Xer (1965-1980), and one Millennial (1981-1996) as these things are generally reckoned.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    edited December 2019
    Correction: 2 Silents (Biden & Sanders), 3 Boomers (Klobuchar, Steyer, & Warren), 1 Gen Xer (Yang), and 1 Millennial (Buttigieg).
  • RossweisseRossweisse Hell Host, 8th Day Host
    Ohher wrote: »
    ...1. There are NO current cabinet members with the right experience, credentials, ideology, training, background, brains, or skills to serve in any branch, department, agency, or service at any level of government in the US. ...
    Not to mention any semblance of morality or honesty. They're all craven crooks.
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    ...I was thinking Elaine Chao might be one to keep on if you had to.
    See my comment above. She's as corrupt as the rest of them, seeking profits for her family's business, and bringing them along on working trips to China. And she's married to Moscow Mitch. I see no upside there.

  • yeah. I'm clutching at straws :)
  • The latest British election has turned an old troupe on its head. Over on this side of the pond, historically the greater the turn out, the more liberal our government will be. Now, it is being questioned, and the Democratic party is taking a serious look at what happened over there.

    I am left wondering if the problem lies with the leadership of the parties. Corbyn was viewed even more negatively than Johnson.

    So it seems the Democrats will need to look at their candidates negative numbers more than the positive numbers.
  • I don't follow British politics much, but I think what happened is that only one party was saying: We are going to get Brexit done ASAP. I think that's what the English wanted. They want Brexit resolved, one way or 'tuther. They are sick to death of it. I'm probably wrong, but that's what it looks like from downunder. In Scotland and Northern Ireland, there was a completely different result. They know that Brexit will be a disaster for them. It looks like Scotland will go, if they can work out a way to do it.

    I don't think it was about Corbyn and his left wing policies. I think Labour tried to run a campaign that was all about Brexit by offering an unclear policy on what they wanted, and trying to convince people that it wasn't about Brexit. I understand that Corbyn never actually said that he wanted Britain in or out of the EU. The Labour strategy crashed and burned.

    I think the implications for American politics are limited. But I do think you are right to say that we should pay attention to the unfavorables. Mostly, I think we on the Ship should hold our breath, wait for the primaries to give us clarity, and then get in behind the candidate, even if it is Biden or Buttigeig.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Julián Castro has ended his presidential run.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    Julián Castro has ended his presidential run.

    I saw that this morning and was surprised that he was still in the running.

  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Pigwidgeon wrote: »
    Crœsos wrote: »
    Julián Castro has ended his presidential run.

    I saw that this morning and was surprised that he was still in the running.

    I was surprised that Mike Bennet and Marianne Williamson are still running after Castro dropped out.

    Just kidding about Williamson! Her "campaign" is mostly about marketing her books so it's not surprising she's still trying to drum up free publicity.
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Dismayed as I am by the Democrats' clown-car Cavalcade of Candidates in this campaign (though almost none of these Dems are as preposterous as a few of the weirder Republican contenders in the last couple of Presidential races), the plain fact is that running for public office can be a fairly reliable way to amass modest amounts of money. You don't have to pay your donors back if you lose. (My bet is that this was The Donald's original plan: collect campaign contributions, lose the election, and then ignore the laws which restrict how recipients can use those funds.) If you spend less than you collect, you can collect interest on the excess; you can use it to help allies in their races (and accumulate political influence that way). You can't use it for personal expenses (not that this would stop 45).
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    Robert Reich--a left-leaning monetary expert--has a new video about who he thinks will win the next election.

    (Something tells me he does not like Grandpa Joe.)
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate
    edited January 3
    Gramps--

    Thx for the link. Good video. (Looks like other good ones, too.) I think you're right about Biden. LOL.

    I always think of Stalin when I hear "Grandpa Joe", 'cause that was a nickname for him.

    ETA: Robert Reich was also Secretary of Labor for Bill Clinton, so he's got inside info and experience.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    Golden Key wrote: »
    Gramps--

    Thx for the link. Good video. (Looks like other good ones, too.) I think you're right about Biden. LOL.

    I always think of Stalin when I hear "Grandpa Joe", 'cause that was a nickname for him.

    ETA: Robert Reich was also Secretary of Labor for Bill Clinton, so he's got inside info and experience.

    Does Uncle Joe sound better?
  • Golden KeyGolden Key Shipmate
    edited January 3
    Was Stalin "Uncle Joe"? Sorry if I got that wrong.

    (ETA: I just looked, and he *was* "Uncle Joe".)

    But calling Biden "Uncle Joe" could be worse, at least to people who've seen the old "Petticoat Junction" TV series. Uncle Joe was portrayed as shiftless, lazy, trying to get out of doing things, and taking lots of naps. Even in the theme song: "And that's Uncle Joe, / He's a movin' kinda slow / At the junction...Petticoat Junction!"


  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    It's now exactly one month until the Iowa caucuses, so I thought I'd do another state of the Democratic primary update. You can read my last one here if you're so interested.

    The Front Runner
    • Joe Biden

    Biden is maintains the sole lead, polling support of between 25% and 32% of likely Democratic caucus/primary voters. No one has more support than him within the Democratic Party but 2/3rds to 3/4ths of Democrats support someone else or are still undecided.

    The Second Tier
    • Bernie Sanders
    • Elizabeth Warren

    Sanders and Warren are both polling in the mid- to upper-teens, trailing Biden by ~10 percentage points.

    The Long Shots
    • Michael Bloomberg
    • Pete Buttigieg

    After a brief surge into double digit support Buttigieg has dropped back into the single digits. Bloomberg is a new addition to this list after having spent a truly egregious amount of money on advertising to get to just above 5% support. His difficulties are additionally complicated because his late entry into the race means he's not on the ballot in several states, including all four pre-Super Tuesday states (IA, NH, NV, SC).

    No Chance/Running for Cabinet
    • Michael Bennet
    • Cory Booker
    • John Delaney
    • Tulsi Gabbard
    • Amy Klobuchar
    • Deval Patrick
    • Tom Steyer
    • Marianne Williamson
    • Andrew Yang

    All the candidates on the above list are polling below 5% support. The only suspense left in their candidacies is whether they'll drop out before or after the Iowa caucuses.

    The Dropouts
    • Bill de Blasio
    • Steve Bullock
    • Julián Castro
    • Kirsten Gillibrand
    • Mike Gravel
    • Kamala Harris
    • John Hickenlooper
    • Jay Inslee
    • Wayne Messam
    • Seth Moulton
    • Richard Ojeda
    • Beto O'Rourke
    • Tim Ryan
    • Joe Sestak
    • Eric Swalwell

    These candidates have ended their run for the nomination. Two names have been added to this list since my last entry: Kamala Harris and Julián Castro.

    The remarkable thing is that despite the number of candidates the polling has been remarkably stable since around May 2019. There's always been the Big Three (Biden, trailed by Sanders and Warren), plus one or two longshots (Buttigieg, Harris, and now Bloomberg). No one else has managed a breakthrough, even briefly.

    Here's some early state polling. A win, or even a strong showing, in one of these states can boost a lower-tier candidate to prominence.

    Iowa: [3 Feb, 41 delegates] This state currently looks like a three-way Biden-Buttigieg-Sanders tie, with Warren about six points behind them in fourth place. No one else is even close to the crucial 15% threshold.

    New Hampshire: [11 Feb, 24 delegates] This state looks like a Biden-Sanders tie with Warren and Buttigieg tied not too far below the leaders, just barely outside the polling margin of error.

    Nevada: [22 Feb, 36 delegates] As always Nevada gets neglected by pollsters. The last poll of this state was conducted in mid-November, at a time when Elizabeth Warren was having a surge of support. Extrapolating from national trends since then makes this state look like Biden is in the lead here, followed by Sanders and then Warren.

    South Carolina: [29 Feb, 54 delegates] South Carolina has more or less the same projected ranking as Nevada, except Biden's margin of support here over Sanders and Warren is even bigger.

    So this is the current "state of play" one month before the Iowa caucuses. The next time I do this I'll be able to give a delegate count.
  • Gramps49Gramps49 Shipmate
    It seems Cory Booker is getting a lot of free airtime by making himself available to give his reactions to the Iraqi situation.
  • From the "stranger and curiouser" side of things*:
    "Hillary Clinton appointed chancellor of Queen's University, Belfast" (BBC, Jan. 2, 2020).

    I saw this on the news crawl on "ABC World News" (US) this morning, and couldn't believe it. But they kept showing it.

    I suppose it could be a fresh start for her--and it also signals that she's not going to try to run for president this time. I knew she'd said recently that she was 'under enormous pressure' to run in 2020 (BBC, Nov. 20, 2019).

    As much as I deeply want a woman president; and as much as I wanted it to be her; and as much as I think the election may have been stolen from her...having her run again, at this point, would mess everything up.

    The article says the job is largely ceremonial, so I don't know how much time she'd spend in N. Ireland. (Or what her husband might be up to.)

    The first article links to another about "Hillary Clinton's connections to NI peace process" (BBC, 2016). After a quick skim, it looks like opinions vary on that; but she does seem to have some connections.

    I hope it goes well for her, and everyone involved.

    *Like we don't have enough of that already!
Sign In or Register to comment.