generation x and millennial voters outvoted boomers and previous generations in 2016 and 2018

biden is a bad choice

[Edited on June 11, 2019 at 9:00 AM. Reason : .]

6/11/2019 9:00:40 AM

I mean, when you’re choices are Bernard Kerik or Bill de Blasio the choice is pretty easy.

Much like if God forbid Biden wins, it’s be an easy choice for me to vote for him over Trump.

Doesn’t make either one popular though.

[Edited on June 11, 2019 at 9:22 AM. Reason : Sorry it was Bo Deitl, which isn’t a major step up from Kerik]

6/11/2019 9:20:26 AM

well obviously vote for anyone on the list in the general

6/11/2019 10:12:36 AM

The one candidate I wanted to really see breakdowns of got cropped out.

BOO.

6/11/2019 11:52:38 AM

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/c4ndc02jx7/econTabReport.pdf

page 99 has the results

6/11/2019 12:59:19 PM

Biden:
“With Trump gone you’re going to begin to see things change. Because these folks know better. They know this isn’t what they’re supposed to be doing."


Biden has no chance at dealing with Republicans if elected

edit:
Lol, someone posted the quote beside this blast from the past


[Edited on June 11, 2019 at 1:08 PM. Reason : .]

6/11/2019 1:03:14 PM

Watching Trump get re-elected is like watching a train-wreck replay in slow motion. DNC has been proactive and set up a lot more cleanly than in 2016 when they had to rig the primary on the fly.

Biden still upward in the polls after the week he had last week. He is at the point where he could shoot someone and go up. No one else stands a chance. MSM will Hyde all of his flaws and still show his empty podium ahead of every rally. "Dueling rallies" today with split screens galore. Boy are they going to have fun covering TWO Trumpian candidates this cycle...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/joe-biden-cure-cancer-president

The people polling Biden are old school moderates (blue dog) and conservatives who will vote that way in the primaries to mitigate losses on abortion, taxes, and immigration. Then, in the general, Trump will be able to easily win them over on the conservative values that attracted them to the moderate candidate in the first place.

A lot of these people say they hate Trump NOW but will hold their nose and vote for him as the lesser evil after Trump unleashes the Ukraine scandal + sexual assault accusations and fox is done labeling him as a socialist.

Progressive voters, young voters, and most of the population are not registered and "likely to vote democrat" thus are not included in any of the polling that will absolutely propel Biden to the nomination. Keep in mind they also aren't allowed to vote in the tightly restrictive democratic primaries.

6/12/2019 12:43:00 AM

Let me be clear, I'm super independent. I've voted for all types for all levels of government.

With that in mind, I'd like to play ticket mash up.

I'd be pretty happy with a Warren/Sanders or Sanders/Warren -> i think the country could use that splash of left if we're ever to take a more European shift. Don't get me wrong, I fully expect a knee jerk reaction on the right and a more double down shift in their stances but starting with that sort of progressive ticket would do well to set the stage for younger voters and maybe build in some social reforms that would be much harder than even AFCA to repeal/dismantle. I'd also take Buttigieg as a VP but not POTUS in for either of those. I think Sanders is in this to be POTUS and isn't likely to be a VP, so Warren/Buttigieg is more probable.

For Biden, I'd vote for him, and would be happy to do so- I'm extremely anyone but Trump, even if people somehow think my impeachment views conflict with that statement. While I agree Biden's policies overlap with Trump a lot, I'm partially excited about the debates showcasing how similar they are on issues, and forcing some republicans to concede that they've been largely advocating centrist-democrat policies while being rabidly Trumpian. I also think this has a clear chance of pulling in moderate republicans (heaven forbid!!!one!) who are tired of an erratic POTUS but are afraid of the status quo. Biden + Warren/Buttigieg/Gillibrand I'd take. Biden - Booker has a good enough ring to it and is pretty generic, and two guys, so I could see that being a probable outcome of all this. I wouldn't be stoked about it but I'd be content and keep on keepin' on.

6/12/2019 2:02:33 AM

So, in your mind, these people who called right of center Hillary Clinton a socialist anti-christ will what, have some kind of revelation in regards to Biden?

6/12/2019 8:13:42 AM

quinnipiac polling shows sanders with the biggest april-june gain a

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2627

14 candidates are polling at less than 1%

6/12/2019 12:09:25 PM

Warren is solid. She's still there.

6/12/2019 12:17:53 PM

Yougov has Warren up on Sanders.

6/12/2019 1:04:37 PM

Nate Silver’s take on Sanders surging:

Quote :

"This is complete BS. Sanders was polling at 19-20% in the RCP average at the end of April, and he's at 17.3% now. Rather than surging, he's lost a couple points. https://t.co/vxnvqEMPRZ"

http://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1138850966932021248

6/12/2019 1:11:59 PM

Yea Bernie took a big dip when Biden came in, but it's still important that he's won back or won over enough two get back to where he was.

Also

Quote :

"Joe Biden meets a voter’s granddaughter in an Iowa coffee shop and asks her age. She says she’s 13. He addresses her brothers. “You’ve got one job here, keep the guys away from your sister.”"

6/12/2019 1:15:41 PM

the RCP average includes polls from over 2 weeks ago, it's good in general but not great at looking at specific progress over a time period. also just ignore nate silver.

our current overall sitation is sanders has pretty much regained what he lost in the pre and post biden announcement bump, biden's bump is basically over, and warren has the biggest gains

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 1:32 PM. Reason : ignore silver]

6/12/2019 1:31:37 PM

When is the first debate?

Seems pretty dumb to have 20 people on the stage. That's like 2 clown cars worth. I'm not sure what the right number is but it's lower than 20.

I'd prefer like two tiers of debates maybe. 10 and 10?

6/12/2019 1:48:54 PM

Quote :

"So, in your mind, these people who called right of center Hillary Clinton a socialist anti-christ will what, have some kind of revelation in regards to Biden?"

No because those people are party loyalists and some extremists. I do believe that those who are right leaning moderates not only will, but, have had some kind of regards to Biden not Trump. I believe the polling by Gallup and reported by the NYT, showing Trump down in not only rust belt areas but also mother fucking Texas, supports that assertion.

Could I please here why you don't view that as the case?

6/12/2019 1:58:08 PM

If Warren is able to consolidate the Bernie support she is best positioned to take on Biden. Really hoping that becomes the case.

She doesn’t have the Bernie cult of personality but she has the better and more in-depth policy platform by a mile.

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 2:12 PM. Reason : FWIW I trust Nate Silver WAY WAY WAY more than David Sirota]

6/12/2019 2:10:39 PM

Quote :

"She doesn’t have the Bernie cult of personality"

That's a plus.

6/12/2019 2:17:33 PM

Quote :

". I do believe that those who are right leaning moderates not only will, but, have had some kind of regards to Biden not Trump. "

so these people just didn't exist during obama and clinton outrage?

6/12/2019 2:17:54 PM

^^^^^ The first debate(s) will be Wednesday, June 26, and Thursday, June 27, from 9 to 11 pm Eastern time both nights.

I believe that there will be 10 candidates on stage each night.

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 2:27 PM. Reason : ]

6/12/2019 2:25:07 PM

Quote :

"Seems pretty dumb to have 20 people on the stage. That's like 2 clown cars worth. I'm not sure what the right number is but it's lower than 20. I'd prefer like two tiers of debates maybe. 10 and 10?"

they aren’t going to have 20+ people on stage. they’re splitting it up into two debates

FWIW, Silver isn’t the only one calling out Team Bernie for boasting over one poll’s numbers

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 2:27 PM. Reason : .]

6/12/2019 2:26:24 PM

They did. They voted for Obama, which is why he won. They didn't vote for Hillary, specifically in the rust belt, which is why she lost even though she captured more than half of the votes. They are now planning to for Biden, which is why he is polling ahead.

Is there a defined hypothesis that contradicts the above regarding why you believe this isn't the case?

6/12/2019 2:26:58 PM

so your claim is that the voters who voted for obama, and didn't vote for clinton, are the moderate republicans who will come around and be open to working with biden after trump is removed?

why did these moderate republicans vote for obama and then not support him at all?

none of this makes any sense

let's go back to your claim, you said:

Quote :

"forcing some republicans to concede that they've been largely advocating centrist-democrat policies while being rabidly Trumpian. I also think this has a clear chance of pulling in moderate republicans (heaven forbid!!!one!) who are tired of an erratic POTUS but are afraid of the status quo"

are you seriously claiming these are the people who voted for obama and not clinton?

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 2:36 PM. Reason : .]

6/12/2019 2:33:13 PM

Quote :

" FWIW, Silver isn’t the only one calling out Team Bernie for boasting over one poll’s numbers"

breaking news: the establishment and centrists don't like bernie

6/12/2019 2:34:01 PM

breaking news: the establishment and centrists aren’t the only ones calling them out for it

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 2:49 PM. Reason : .]

6/12/2019 2:45:37 PM

they are

they are all mad about the dates picked, when it's obvious they were used to show momentum since the biden announcement

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 2:48 PM. Reason : .]

6/12/2019 2:47:35 PM

I'm not sure if your your reading comprehension is worse than your trolling.

It's known that there are people who voted for Obama and then didn't for Clinton. There are some very every spectrum, but also includes moderate republicans.

I'm not sure why you're discussing working with Obama or with Biden. Again, it's known he captured some R's and some of them didn't go for Hillary. Individual voters aren't in office, so they're not exactly in any capacity to work with him and just because they see a candidate as the better choice between two, doesn't trap them in having to support each policy or agenda of that president.

Again, I've asked you a valid question several times and you're not answering it. Either you have no real position on it and your entire philosophy and passion for liberal ideas is knee jerk or you don't plan to share it because you don't intend to have any actual discourse.

It's all the same to me but this interaction is making it more evident you're in one of those two camps.

6/12/2019 4:18:00 PM

you made this claim:

Quote :

""forcing some republicans to concede that they've been largely advocating centrist-democrat policies while being rabidly Trumpian. I also think this has a clear chance of pulling in moderate republicans (heaven forbid!!!one!) who are tired of an erratic POTUS but are afraid of the status quo""

and

Quote :

"I do believe that those who are right leaning moderates not only will, but, have had some kind of regards to Biden not Trump. ""

i replied:

Quote :

"so these people just didn't exist during obama and clinton outrage?"

you replied

Quote :

"They did. They voted for Obama, which is why he won. They didn't vote for Hillary, specifically in the rust belt, "

so you are claiming that moderate republicans voted for obama and not hillary

so, back to my original response: so these people just didn't exist during the obama outrage?

the reason biden and obama working with republicans is being discussed is because biden is saying after the election republicans will have an epiphany. he's said it multiple times. it's insane and wrong. obama said something similar, i posted a headline. history showed us that was also very wrong.

i mean please tell me you are trolling, you're not even keeping up with your own posts

6/12/2019 4:24:11 PM

Quote :

"Either you have no real position on it and your entire philosophy and passion for liberal ideas is knee jerk or you don't plan to share it because you don't intend to have any actual discourse."

Why not both?

6/12/2019 4:44:23 PM

FYI, a significant amount of the people who voted for Obama did not vote for Hillary

https://i.imgur.com/YQXbaZT.jpg

Quote :

"If Warren is able to consolidate the Bernie support she is best positioned to take on Biden. Really hoping that becomes the case. She doesn’t have the Bernie cult of personality but she has the better and more in-depth policy platform by a mile."

Bernie supporters don't support Bernie because of in-depth policy. They support him because of authenticity and consistent record throughout history which is specifically the area where Warren is weak. There is no policy proposal warren can put out that will change the past. Her record isn't Biden bad but its certainly not progressive either. She's a former republican who believes in "good capitalism". She wasn't so progressive 4 years ago when she sat on the sideline and always stated she had no interest in running for president so its hard to believe a 69 year old could suddenly have a progressive awakening after being a die hard conservative in her mid-life.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/23/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democratic-party-2020-differences
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/12/elizabeth-warren-profile-young-republican-2020-president-226613
Warren being on the wrong side of history isn't unlike most politicians, but its not what we need from a leader. This position needs someone with good foresight. Someone who can identify problems at a fundamental, philosophical level and not just after they manifest as a crisis. Leaders who have only reacted to problems in the past are unlikely to see the millions new problems developing today and leave us to deal with the far in the future. Bernie's judgement has been sharp for his entire career.


There is some overlap amongst the groups but Warren is not compatible for many Bernie supporters and there is no way in which Bernie supporters will flip to Warren over Bernie unless Bernie drops out. Bernie supporters aren't going to just be sheep dogged into supporting a candidate based on words. They want action.

Bernie dropping out early is pretty hard to fathom considering he has a support base and organization larger than all of the other candidates combined.

Its cool that Warren is getting her name and policy details out there for a future position and I hope that is the only reason she is "running" because if she isn't working with Bernie by January, all she will be doing is handing Biden the nomination. No one who truly believes in these policies would do such a thing. I'm going to hold my judgement and wait and see what happens but Warren has the potential to be a bigger hindrance to progressive values than anyone simply by splitting the vote.

[Edited on June 12, 2019 at 5:59 PM. Reason : warren is exactly why biden and trump will win]

6/12/2019 5:57:29 PM

oh look, Earl.

6/12/2019 6:12:54 PM

Tbh i find myself agreeing with dtr a surprising amount on here, but I'm not real sure how much basis the gepetto argument has. It's certainly true that a chunk of Obama voters switched to Trump. And I would bet that some of could possibly be persuaded to switch back to Biden. The key question is, would courting them be a winning election strategy. I think dtr and I have argued that would NOT be a winning strategy, but it seems geppeto agrees that, at least, it wouldn't be the BEST strategy based on his stated candidate preference. Now, I don't think many true Republicans (not sure if he meant voters, pundits, elected officials, all?) would jump up to conceded anything, so that's arguable. But I think the rest of his post matches fairly well with my more leftist take on 2020, perhaps with less conviction.

6/12/2019 7:44:44 PM

The twitter beef between warren and sanders supporters is getting weird

The media of coverage of Biden is starting to echo how Hillary was covered— minor missteps blown out of proportion and statements taken out of context and magnified.

I don’t even like Biden, he’s my least favorite choice, but the extra attention he’s getting is serving both to raise his profile beyond where it should be and make him into a joke.

Yang is getting less coverage than people polling lower than him.

6/12/2019 8:15:59 PM

thanks, rwoody you just saved me a lot of typing. To clarify your questions, I'm not discussing pundits, or members of congress, but simply moderate- and most likely educated- conservatives, who data suggests voted for Obama but not Clinton.

I suspect that, like before, they may be willing to take an L on a president, especially Biden, to incorporate some stability, even if policies don't 100% align, with the expectation that the republican senate majority will maintain and temper some of the policies they view as most unfavorable.

6/13/2019 12:06:20 AM

Quote :

"It's certainly true that a chunk of Obama voters switched to Trump."

obama got 9% of republicans, clinton got 8% of republicans

are you seriously seriously saying that these people are why obama won and why clinton lost, and that joe biden will win these people over and republicans will have an epiphany about their political beliefs?

seriously?

for context, jimmy carter got 11% in his loss to reagan


(obama got just 6% in 2012, but 2008 is a more relevant since turnout was higher and that needs to be a goal in 2020)

[Edited on June 13, 2019 at 8:44 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2019 8:23:21 AM

Quote :

"obama got 9% of republicans, clinton got 8% of republicans"

Yea I didn't focus on the "republican" portion of his post but I would consider anyone who voted for Trump "republican"

Quote :

"are you seriously seriously saying that these people are why obama won and why clinton lost, and that joe biden will win these people over and republicans will have an epiphany about their political beliefs?"

In fact, no, I didn't say anything close to either of those statements. There's a million reasons why Obama won and Clinton lost, voters jumping from Obama to Trump didn't hurt.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama-Trump_voters

I don't know where you got the "epiphany" and changed "political beliefs". There are certainly...lets say more conservative voters that would typically support a Republican presidential candidate that would vote biden over Trump. Look at Duke, he'll barely lay out his beliefs but he's certainly conservative and ha implied he would vote Biden. I bet there is also a core group that may be more likely to stay home for Trump-Biden but might be more motivated to vote for Trump vs Sanders or Warren, bc of the boogeyman. Again, see Duke. None of this involves epiphanys or changing political beliefs. Biden is right of Clinton and a man, that will be enough for some people.

6/13/2019 8:54:29 AM

Quote :

"I don't know where you got the "epiphany" and changed "political beliefs"."

oh my god why is no one following the conversation

6/13/2019 9:00:26 AM

Wait is your entire premise that gepetto agrees with Biden's "epiphany" statement? Bc I don't think he said that. I definitely didn't and you quoted my post. I didn't read gepettos post as related to the Biden comment at all, but maybe I missed context

[Edited on June 13, 2019 at 9:07 AM. Reason : You're the first one on this page to mention "epiphany" ]

[Edited on June 13, 2019 at 9:07 AM. Reason : Not sure why you have trouble reading my post ]

Me: I think X
D: WHAT? You seriously think Y?
Me: what? No, I said I think X not Y
D: why is no one following the conversation?

[Edited on June 13, 2019 at 9:11 AM. Reason : E]

6/13/2019 9:05:59 AM

biden made the epiphany statement (at least twice), and said

Quote :

"“With Trump gone you’re going to begin to see things change. Because these folks know better. They know this isn’t what they’re supposed to be doing.""

and i said

Quote :

"Biden has no chance at dealing with Republicans if elected"

gepetto said

Quote :

"While I agree Biden's policies overlap with Trump a lot, I'm partially excited about the debates showcasing how similar they are on issues, and forcing some republicans to concede that they've been largely advocating centrist-democrat policies while being rabidly Trumpian. I also think this has a clear chance of pulling in moderate republicans (heaven forbid!!!one!) who are tired of an erratic POTUS but are afraid of the status quo. "

i replied

Quote :

"So, in your mind, these people who called right of center Hillary Clinton a socialist anti-christ will what, have some kind of revelation in regards to Biden?"

and gepetto replied

Quote :

". I do believe that those who are right leaning moderates not only will, but, have had some kind of regards to Biden not Trump."

and i asked

Quote :

"so these people just didn't exist during obama and clinton outrage?"

and he claimed

Quote :

"They did. They voted for Obama, which is why he won. They didn't vote for Hillary, specifically in the rust belt, which is why she lost even though she captured more than half of the votes. They are now planning to for Biden, which is why he is polling ahead."

so i posted

Quote :

"so your claim is that the voters who voted for obama, and didn't vote for clinton, are the moderate republicans who will come around and be open to working with biden after trump is removed? why did these moderate republicans vote for obama and then not support him at all? none of this makes any sense let's go back to your claim, you said:"

then quoted his claim and asked

Quote :

"are you seriously claiming these are the people who voted for obama and not clinton?"

referring to the"rabid trumpian" people who will "concede they have been advocating centrist-democratic"

6/13/2019 9:12:17 AM

"rabidly trumpian" people aren't going to suddenly have an epiphany about the positions or support biden

6/13/2019 9:13:36 AM

Yea, could be wrong, but I think your key mistake was narcissm thinking geppettos first post on this page was a response to yours. It seems completely unrelated to me. Geppetto never once said republicans in congress would work with biden. He merely implied some would vote for him. He also didn't sya that those rabidly trumpian people would vote for Biden

[Edited on June 13, 2019 at 9:19 AM. Reason : E]

6/13/2019 9:16:00 AM

i give up

6/13/2019 9:22:59 AM

Makes sense, it's hard work misunderstanding the point of other people's posts. If you want to make life easier you could ask more direct questions "what do mean that 'rabidly trumpian' would concede? In what way would they concede? Would they vote for Biden, voraciously support him, or do just mean in more of a private conversation way? Also was your post a direct response to Biden's 'epiphany' stuff or just a standalone read on the election?"

Actually wait that's actually harder work than misunderstanding. Now I get it.

6/13/2019 9:43:10 AM

rwoody is dead on regarding my intent and how unrelated it was to dtownral’s post. Not only did my statement not directly follow or carrot his but I also started the conversation with a free thought ticket mash up.

And like rwoody said there are lots of reasons contributing to an HRC loss, not aggressive enough with a powerful enough progressive message, not visiting rust belt states, having too much political baggage, Comey, etc. Anyone or all of those could have contributed but I can’t say by what margins. What I can say is she lost some states because she had fewer votes there. Most of those states she lost by small, 1% or fewer points, margins. A swing in republican voters, meaning a loss in votes for Trump and a gain for Biden, does a lot to reverse those margins and create a Biden win. This is why, despite numerous components, I say the moderate swing is why she lost and Biden can win mutatis mutandis.

6/13/2019 10:33:18 AM

i give up, you saying that rabidly trumpian people will concede that they've been advocating for centrist democrat policies (lol) must have been taken out of context and meant something else in an undisclosed context

6/13/2019 10:37:54 AM

I'm curious and not entirely sure what he meant by that statement also, but since he followed it up by saying "maybe moderates will vote Biden", I didn't think he meant rapid Trumpers would support Biden. I kinda took it more that he'll be arguing with people at work or something, but I don't know.

6/13/2019 10:42:46 AM

jfc

6/13/2019 10:45:50 AM

I know right! Crazy how much harder it is to communicate on a written anonymous medium when you can't get tone, history, attitude, or nuance. Crazy that you sometimes have to ask before assuming meaning of an unclear sentence.

6/13/2019 10:51:01 AM

i'll concede that you guys are bad at communicating

6/13/2019 11:40:17 AM