SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

[Ender]

Biden, though unquestionably far better than Trump,

I strongly question whether that is the case.

Keep in mind, the worst case scenario is not 8 years of Trump. Trump is a fucking clown with a weak grasp over the party - he has largely bent to their will than the reverse. His low attention span and laziness means many of his key and most horrific policies have fallen apart. As bad as it is, this is still vastly better than what we saw in the aughts under Bush. He can't even mobilize people to the streets like he keeps threatening; his base is overwhelmingly old people who just want to imagine they are young and strong again.

The worst case scenario is we put in Biden or Harris or Booker who spend the next few years implementing austerity and up arming the police while completely ignoring the core issues that gave us Trump in the first place. And then we hit another recession and this time we get Tucker Carlson or Tom Cotton, someone with their shit together spouting the same hate and they have an active base of 20 and 30 year olds who will take to the streets and pull the trigger.

I've been a political organizer for 11 years. I've been gassed, arrested, accosted and threatened in the course of building communities, unions, and winning elections. The attacks on Hispanics is a direct attack on me and my family. And the latter situation, where Biden gets in and fucks around instead of someone who will at least start the structural overall, that is what makes my blood run cold and keeps me up at night.

[The Romulan Republic]

Biden, though unquestionably far better than Trump,

I strongly question whether that is the case.

Keep in mind, the worst case scenario is not 8 years of Trump. Trump is a fucking clown with a weak grasp over the party - he has largely bent to their will than the reverse. His low attention span and laziness means many of his key and most horrific policies have fallen apart. As bad as it is, this is still vastly better than what we saw in the aughts under Bush. He can't even mobilize people to the streets like he keeps threatening; his base is overwhelmingly old people who just want to imagine they are young and strong again.

The worst case scenario is we put in Biden or Harris or Booker who spend the next few years implementing austerity and up arming the police while completely ignoring the core issues that gave us Trump in the first place. And then we hit another recession and this time we get Tucker Carlson or Tom Cotton, someone with their shit together spouting the same hate and they have an active base of 20 and 30 year olds who will take to the streets and pull the trigger.

I've been a political organizer for 11 years. I've been gassed, arrested, accosted and threatened in the course of building communities, unions, and winning elections. The attacks on Hispanics is a direct attack on me and my family. And the latter situation, where Biden gets in and fucks around instead of someone who will at least start the structural overall, that is what makes my blood run cold and keeps me up at night.

There are an almost infinite number of ways that the situation could go wrong, but suggesting that a Biden Presidency, or a Booker or Harris Presidency, would be as bad as a Trump one does nothing to help. Its not accurate, and all it does is play into Trumper/Kremlin "Both Sides" narratives and Whataboutism, normalize Trump's actions, and encourage voters to stay home or split the vote if a moderate is the nominee.

Put it this way: If Biden or Harris or Booker wins, they might fuck up, a disaster might happen during their Presidency, and someone even worse than Trump might win in four or eight years. If Trump wins, the US WILL be ruled by a fascist autocrat who can now claim a mandate from the American people, barring a revolution of some sort to remove him from power.

There are effectively two parties in America right now: Democrats, and Fascists. One or the other will rule the country in 2021. Push for someone more progressive in the primaries by all means- that's what I'm going to do. But if so-called progressives refuse to vote for a moderate nominee, or promote bullshit "Both Sides" narratives that encourage others to do so, and thereby throw the country to Trump, we will not get a second chance. More importantly, the refugee children who are torn from their families, die, or are raped in US custody will not get a second chance. The women who are prosecuted for having a miscarriage or die from an unsafe illegal abortion will not get a second chance. The civilians and soldiers slaughtered if Trump invades Venezeula or Iran or finally goes too far with Kim Jong Un will not get a second chance. The people who starve or lose their homes because they couldn't afford health care will not get a second chance. Instead of maybe having a fascist country in 8 years, we will have a fascist country now.

When I see all the old "Both Sides" crap from self-proclaimed progressives bubbling up again, when I can feel the ground swell building to throw the country to Trump and women and minorities to the wolves if a Leftist isn't the nominee again, even after two and a half years of seeing what Trump is, it makes me feel sick to my stomach. And it fills me with rage.

I expect progressives to back a centrist nominee. I expect centrists to back a progressive nominee. The US allied with the fucking Soviets to stop fascism in WW2. The two wings of the Democratic Party can suck it up and work together to stop fascism now. Or we might as well throw in the towel and declare Trump President for Life today.

You're thinking ahead. Good. But long term planning won't mean jack if we get obliterated now. We need to win this fight to stay alive. Then we can worry about winning the next one.

[FireNexus]

I think the absolute funniest part of Biden’s ascendancy is how the polls look like he took very little from any particular candidate except Sanders, who seems to have lost basically the exact number of points Biden picked up since he announced. Watching the “Bernie’s support is about his policy/vision/political revolution” narrative fall apart as soon as another old white guy with strong support gets into the race (and especially one that is demonstrably worse on most progressive priorities than Hillary Clinton) is fucking magical to me.

I don’t want Biden to win this time, but watching Bernie himself figure out in real time what his support was basically always about is probably my favorite storyline of this whole season.

[Jub]

Push for someone more progressive in the primaries by all means- that's what I'm going to do. But if so-called progressives refuse to vote for a moderate nominee, or promote bullshit "Both Sides" narratives that encourage others to do so, and thereby throw the country to Trump, we will not get a second chance.

Personally, I don't think the Democrats can afford to put up another 'safe' or status quo candidate this time around and the pre-primary campaign period is the time to send that message. Plus, those demanding a truly progressive candidate aren't likely to be fooled by Trump or his ilk a second time so at worst they'll stay home or vote for a third party nominee and deflate some numbers rather than voting Trump as happened in 2016.

Once again this shows that the Dems have serious issues with party message and a voter base splitting between centrism and far more left-leaning ideologies. I feel like they can best solve this by, as a party, realizing that it's better to take a stand and risk failure than to proceed as they have been. They don't need to go full lock step Republican to do that but a more unified active approach, as opposed to a divided and reactive one, will fire up their base and help turn around that loser reputation they have.

When I see all the old "Both Sides" crap from self-proclaimed progressives bubbling up again, when I can feel the ground swell building to throw the country to Trump and women and minorities to the wolves if a Leftist isn't the nominee again, even after two and a half years of seeing what Trump is, it makes me feel sick to my stomach. And it fills me with rage.

That's on the Dems. They've had how long to push for impeaching or otherwise limiting Trump's power, a poor but not entirely damning report, and a string of criminal charges that stuck to people close to Trump and the best they can give is 'Maybe if the polls show 60% or greater support and the stars align we'll talk about impeaching him' doesn't inspire anybody. Now would be the time to talk tough and act tougher not to cooly calculate the political capital lost and gained by waiting another couple of months.

I don't blame anybody that looks at the centrist Dems and feels no affinity for them.

You're thinking ahead. Good. But long term planning won't mean jack if we get obliterated now. We need to win this fight to stay alive. Then we can worry about winning the next one.

Take a step back from the ledge there. Things are bad but you're literally scaremongering about nuclear war and extermination camps. The first is vanishingly unlikely no matter what anybody does and the second, while the second is still a fairly large step up from what's going on in ICE detention centers.

[Ender]

There are an almost infinite number of ways that the situation could go wrong, but suggesting that a Biden Presidency, or a Booker or Harris Presidency, would be as bad as a Trump one does nothing to help. Its not accurate, and all it does is play into Trumper/Kremlin "Both Sides" narratives and Whataboutism, normalize Trump's actions, and encourage voters to stay home or split the vote if a moderate is the nominee.

Ah, got it, you are one of those cranks. I won't bother taking you seriously then.

Hey, which Russian shitpost do you think was the most effective in rigging the election, the shirtless cartoon Bernie that had no words appended to it, or the one of Yosemite Sam standing in front of a Confederate flag ranting about liberals?

Put it this way: If Biden or Harris or Booker wins, they might fuck up, a disaster might happen during their Presidency, and someone even worse than Trump might win in four or eight years. If Trump wins, the US WILL be ruled by a fascist autocrat who can now claim a mandate from the American people, barring a revolution of some sort to remove him from power.

Turn off the MSNBC kid, it is rotting your brain.

Push for someone more progressive in the primaries by all means- that's what I'm going to do.

Lol you said you are backing Buttigieg in another thread you fucking liar.

But if so-called progressives refuse to vote for a moderate nominee, or promote bullshit "Both Sides" narratives that encourage others to do so, and thereby throw the country to Trump, we will not get a second chance. More importantly, the refugee children who are torn from their families, die, or are raped in US custody will not get a second chance. The women who are prosecuted for having a miscarriage or die from an unsafe illegal abortion will not get a second chance. The civilians and soldiers slaughtered if Trump invades Venezeula or Iran or finally goes too far with Kim Jong Un will not get a second chance. The people who starve or lose their homes because they couldn't afford health care will not get a second chance. Instead of maybe having a fascist country in 8 years, we will have a fascist country now.

Everything you just listed was happening under Obama kid. I know, you think that pointing out facts is Russian propaganda, but they are rather stubborn things.

When I see all the old "Both Sides" crap from self-proclaimed progressives bubbling up again, when I can feel the ground swell building to throw the country to Trump and women and minorities to the wolves if a Leftist isn't the nominee again, even after two and a half years of seeing what Trump is, it makes me feel sick to my stomach. And it fills me with rage.

So what? You gonna hold your breath until you pass out?

I expect progressives to back a centrist nominee.

Fuck off you entitled child. You want power, organize. You aren't owed submission.

I expect centrists to back a progressive nominee. The US allied with the fucking Soviets to stop fascism in WW2. The two wings of the Democratic Party can suck it up and work together to stop fascism now. Or we might as well throw in the towel and declare Trump President for Life today.

Great, bend the knee then, since you fucks have shown you can't win against the threat.

Oh wait, you won't do that just because there is a bigger threat? That it's just a rhetorical cudgel, and that politics is still a contest for power?

Wow, whoda thunk?

You're thinking ahead. Good. But long term planning won't mean jack if we get obliterated now. We need to win this fight to stay alive. Then we can worry about winning the next one.

And capping it with the pure condescension of someone who doesn't do the work.

Fuck off kid. Turn off the MSNBC, and go do actual organizing, and build the power you think you are entitled to.

[The Romulan Republic]

For your information, I have volunteered for and donated to both the BC Green Party and the Democratic Party.In point of fact, I am to my knowledge the only active poster on this board who has actually run as a candidate for political office (if only at the municipal level). I did this while working a minimum wage job. Could I have done more? Sure. But I have long since grown tired of people just trying to paint me as a spoiled rich kid who just sits on his ass all day, because they'd rather debate a straw man than my arguments.

I spoke to you civilly, which is clearly more than you deserve given both your views and expressing my view and my reasons for it like a mature adult. You didn't like what I had to say, probably because you know that I'm right, you know that your position amounts to "Make America Fascist if we don't get the nominee we want", and you have no just or fact-based counter argument to defend it, so you fall back on abuse and ridicule and libel. Ultimately, regardless of your reasons, you have made virtually no effort to reply to, refute, or engage with any point I made. Your entire post is personal abuse based on an imaginary Straw Lazy Liberal Millennial you're debating in your head, peppered with some collusion denialism, some random ranting about MSNBC that sounds like it was posted by a Trumper, and a line of generic "Both Sides" rhetoric.

I'm not a mod, but last time I checked, making a post composed almost entirely of ad hominems and refusing to engage the other person's arguments was considered dishonest debating, and against board rules. Either reply to my points with actual arguments, concede, fuck off, or expect me to report you.

Oh, and I just love how I'm "entitled" because I don't think I'm justified in throwing the most powerful nation in the world to fascism if I don't get the nominee I want. On behalf of all the human beings you're evidently prepared to throw under the bus if you don't get your way, suck my dick.

[The Romulan Republic]

There are exactly two kinds of voters in the country right now: Democrats, and Fascists. If you're not with the one, you are functionally with the other. It shouldn't be that way, but it is. To anyone thinking of voting third party or staying home or voting Trump because they didn't get the nominee they want, or because "Both Sides", or because they don't want to vote for "the lesser evil"- understand that if Trump wins, again, if a fascist who believes that he is above the law and has actively worked to make that goal a reality gets a second term and the sanction of the electorate because you sat on your fucking asses, then I, and more importantly history, will hold you personally responsible. For every person who dies from climate change or because they lost their health care or their food stamps or their wellfare, for every woman who dies because she can't get an abortion or goes to jail because she had a miscarriage, for every dissident jailed for "treason" for daring to question or investigate the President, for every protester shot, for every mass shooting victim, for every little child torn from their family and raped in US custody or sent home to die. Every. Single. One. We will hold you responsible.

Oh, by the way, did you know that Trump is on a spree of appointing judges who oppose Brown vs Board of education? Yeah, they're actually laying the groundwork to bring segregation back. But go on, tell me how "Both sides are just as bad" and how not voting to stop the fascist who's going to re-segregate America is the "principled" choice.

[The Romulan Republic]

I think the absolute funniest part of Biden’s ascendancy is how the polls look like he took very little from any particular candidate except Sanders, who seems to have lost basically the exact number of points Biden picked up since he announced. Watching the “Bernie’s support is about his policy/vision/political revolution” narrative fall apart as soon as another old white guy with strong support gets into the race (and especially one that is demonstrably worse on most progressive priorities than Hillary Clinton) is fucking magical to me.

I don’t want Biden to win this time, but watching Bernie himself figure out in real time what his support was basically always about is probably my favorite storyline of this whole season.

I see you're just going to ignore the polls I cited earlier showing strong support from women, Latinos, and young people of all demographics for Bernie, so you can repeat the old "Everyone who supports Bernie is just a racist misogynist white man" lie from Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign.

I'm not even supporting him this time around, and this oversimplified, slanderous, spiteful narrative offends me so much that it makes me want to back him as a fuck you. Which I bring up not to start a pissing contest, but to point out that reusing Clinton's anti-Bernie propaganda from 2016 is just opening old wounds to no good purpose, and alienating progressives and Bernie supporters who WE WILL NEED in 2020.

[FireNexus]

I see you're just going to ignore the polls I cited earlier showing strong support from women, Latinos, and young people of all demographics for Bernie, so you can repeat the old "Everyone who supports Bernie is just a racist misogynist white man" lie from Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign.

I didn’t say everyone supporting Sanders was a racist misogynist. I said that a massive chunk of his support got siphoned off instantly by the only other old white guy who came into the race. If you want to fight a straw man, go ahead. But it’s clear: Sanders candidacy, at least this time around, was apparently made non-viable by the entry of another high-profile old white guy into the raace. And as he seems to continue slowly bleeding support to the rest of the field, it’s looking awfully like his position among everyone was boosted by the borowed credibility he got from them giving him front runner status.

Sanders not being exclusively supported by them is not meaningful if he needs their support to win, which has always been my contention and which is proving hilariously true. I know it chaps your ass to think that maybe in 2016 you were pulled onto the bandwagon by the gravitational pull of a bunch of assholes you wouldn’t voluntarily associate with, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

I'm not even supporting him this time around, and this oversimplified, slanderous, spiteful narrative offends me so much that it makes me want to back him as a fuck you.

You’re the one who oversimplified the narrative. What I said was that Sanders collapsed as soon as the racist misogynists had a viable alternative. Which is true, and obvious. What I’m saying now is that his “broad base of support” seems to be collapsing further as soon as he doesn’t have the borrowed leverage of his dick and his melanin content to boost his numbers. Maybe Biden is forced out or his numbers fall, but I think it’s reasonable to assume that the assholes aren’t going to be giving him back their support as long as Biden is running. And I think it’s clear that he doesn’t have any kind of a shot as long as they don’t.

My hypothesis gives a clear prediction, though: At some point before September, Sanders will fall to a clear third. Probably behind a woman. If that woman is Warren, he might well be out of the race before a vote is cast. If that happens, I look forward to you eating crow. (This assumes Biden stays in the race. I expect him to become front runner again if Biden dies or has to drop out or something.)

Which I bring up not to start a pissing contest, but to point out that reusing Clinton's anti-Bernie propaganda from 2016 is just opening old wounds to no good purpose, and alienating progressives and Bernie supporters who WE WILL NEED in 2020.

I’m not reusing propaganda. I’m pointing out that the polling trend since Biden announced is exactly what it would look like if my theory of the Bernie case was right all along. You can cry about it if you want, or you can come to terms with the fact that your choice in 2016 was at least partially influenced by racism or misogyny. Not yours, but definitely someone else’s.

[FireNexus]

Also, I really thought that one was going to just go by without you having to defensively lash out at it. It took you six days after the last activity on the thread to see and you just couldn’t help yourself. Well, fuck Bernie Sanders, and feel free to give him your support to spite me. At least this time you won’t be jumping on the racist misogynist bandwagon and unwilling to admit it for four years.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, I see the bitter ex-Clinton supporters are just as eager to re-right 2016 as the Bernie-or-Busters.

Guess we can probably look forward to a split vote, another win for the Orange Rapist, and goodbye Republic.

I love how you seem to think I'd somehow be upset if Bernie lost to Warren, though. Warren's been my first choice pretty much since she entered this race, and the fact that she's willing to call for impeachment while he isn't has only confirmed that.

[FireNexus]

Well, I see the bitter ex-Clinton supporters are just as eager to re-right 2016 as the Bernie-or-Busters.

Guess we can probably look forward to a split vote, another win for the Orange Rapist, and goodbye Republic.

I love how you seem to think I'd somehow be upset if Bernie lost to Warren, though. Warren's been my first choice pretty much since she entered this race, and the fact that she's willing to call for impeachment while he isn't has only confirmed that.

Oh fuck off, you condescending, self-righteous prick. And stop putting fucking words in my mouth.

[Jub]

I just looked at Warren's policies. She seems like a pretty safe choice, a few steps to the center more than I'd favor, but here policies seem like a decent start even if her being an unabashed capitalist and financial conservation are less than appealing traits.

The real question is, will she be able to do what Obama couldn't and get her policies through in spite of Republican pressure? If she, or any other Democratic President, can't we're doomed to a one step forward two steps back cycle where the Democrats have to bleed political capital just to reset after the last wave of Republican policies.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, I see the bitter ex-Clinton supporters are just as eager to re-right 2016 as the Bernie-or-Busters.

Guess we can probably look forward to a split vote, another win for the Orange Rapist, and goodbye Republic.

I love how you seem to think I'd somehow be upset if Bernie lost to Warren, though. Warren's been my first choice pretty much since she entered this race, and the fact that she's willing to call for impeachment while he isn't has only confirmed that.

Oh fuck off, you condescending, self-righteous prick. And stop putting fucking words in my mouth.

You're just proving my point. I won't belabour the point any more, though, because fueling divisions on the Left right now is only doing Trump and Putin's work for them.

[The Romulan Republic]

I just looked at Warren's policies. She seems like a pretty safe choice, a few steps to the center more than I'd favor, but here policies seem like a decent start even if her being an unabashed capitalist and financial conservation are less than appealing traits.

The real question is, will she be able to do what Obama couldn't and get her policies through in spite of Republican pressure? If she, or any other Democratic President, can't we're doomed to a one step forward two steps back cycle where the Democrats have to bleed political capital just to reset after the last wave of Republican policies.

That depends entirely on how many House and Senate seats we get, and how many of them are Democrats in Name Only like Manchin.

And on how willing she is to use the same broad executive powers that have given Trump so much leeway to push through things in spite of Congress.

[Jub]

And on how willing she is to use the same broad executive powers that have given Trump so much leeway to push through things in spite of Congress.

Given that she can't control how the Senate and the House will go I hope she's willing to commit to getting her policies enacted using the means available to her.

[The Romulan Republic]

And on how willing she is to use the same broad executive powers that have given Trump so much leeway to push through things in spite of Congress.

Given that she can't control how the Senate and the House will go I hope she's willing to commit to getting her policies enacted using the means available to her.

Yeah, while the powers of the Executive ultimately need to be reigned in, at present I lean towards the view that for pretty much anything not actually unconstitutional, turnabout is fair play.

[The Romulan Republic]

An alternative theory for why Bernie is losing votes- many of them are going to Warren:

https://www.newsweek.com/2020-poll-eliz ... ng-1429083

Support for Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren's progressive 2020 presidential bid is growing, while self-described Democratic socialist Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders continues to drop in the polls.

According to a new Fox News survey, Warren has gained 5 percentage points since March and is now polling at 9 percent among Democratic primary voters. Sanders has dropped 6 percentage points since March as he now stands at 17 percent.

Sanders still remains at the top of the crowded Democratic primary field, which as of Friday consisted of 24 candidates vying for the party’s nomination to take on President Donald Trump in the upcoming election.

Former Vice President Joe Biden, despite being one of the last candidates to enter the race, has the most support among primary voters. According to Fox News, Biden is polling at 35 percent. Sanders is the closest to Biden but still remains 18 points behind. Warren is in third place, according to the survey, trailing Sanders by 9 percentage points.

Both Sanders and Warren are considered the more progressive candidates in the 2020 field, churning out bold policy proposals that go after Wall Street and aim to break up large technology companies like Facebook. The two also have plans for free college tuition and universal health care.

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren during a campaign stop at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, on May 16. According to a recent Fox News survey, Warren's 2020 bid has growing support, while Bernie Sanders continues to drop in the polls.

On Friday, Warren became the first 2020 candidate to release a comprehensive plan to protect abortion rights. Her proposal arrived as several states, including Alabama and Georgia, passed strict anti-abortion laws aimed at challenging Roe v. Wade.

“The overwhelming majority of Americans have no desire to return to the world before Roe v. Wade,” Warren said in a post as she announced the proposal. “And so the time to act is now.”

Her plan focuses on creating federal statutory rights to abortion, which would prohibit states from trying to pass laws that interfere with the ability of health care providers to perform the procedure. It also urges Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the federal government from imposing restrictions on private health insurers when it comes to abortion-related procedures.

Nearly all the 2020 Democratic hopefuls have spoken out against Republican-led initiatives to limit abortion services. Earlier this week, Democrats labeled Alabama’s law, which makes it a felony for doctors to perform an abortion, “disgusting” and “dangerous.”

To be blunt, I think Sanders made a major strategic and tactical blunder when he refused to endorse impeachment. He cast himself as a aligned with the Centrists (likely because he has likely delusional views that he can win over large numbers of Trump voters), allowing Warren, by calling for impeachment, to outflank him on the Left.

[The Romulan Republic]

More on Warren:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... paying-off

Aides and allies to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) say her policy proposals are showing signs of paying off in the Democratic primary race.

Warren has offered a steady series of proposals on a number of issues, from creating a wealth tax to improving housing for military families, that have won media attention and positive nods from liberals looking for substance in the crowded field of Democratic contenders.

The policy papers are a part of Warren’s wonky brand, and her supporters are embracing them with T-shirts that say “I have a plan for that,” the motto for Warren’s campaign.

“Every day she is on the trail making clear how she diagnoses problems, where she sees solutions and that she is a candidate of substance,” said one aide to Warren.

In private conversations, the Massachusetts senator has long concluded that the party won’t win just by being anti-President Trump.

The winning candidate has to also have a vision for their agenda as president, and that’s the strategy she has seized on, those close to her say.

“Democrats can’t just be the party of resistance,” the aide to Warren said. “If we want to beat Donald Trump, we also have to be a party of ideas and a party of vision. We have to demonstrate our commitment to making real change in the economy and in Washington.”

Unaffiliated Democratic strategists have also been impressed with Warren’s strategy.

“It seems like they’re doing a nice tortoise-and-the-hare-slow-and-steady climb, running the race they want and ignoring the day-to-day hype,” said Eddie Vale, a Democratic strategist. “I think that people are definitely paying attention to and liking her policy proposals.”

Warren has appeared at more than 70 town halls and won praise from pundits after a CNN town hall last month. After Warren addressed criminal justice at a “She the People” event aimed at black women, she received a standing ovation.

Vale said Warren is using her policy bent to change people’s impressions of her. He said supporters and possible supporters aren’t “seeing the wonky professor stereotype but a great public speaker weaving her policies in with values, emotion and her personal story.”

Warren is trending in the right direction when it comes to the polls.

A Fox News poll out this week showed her support more than double from 4 percent in March to 9 percent this month, placing her in third place behind former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Other recent surveys also show her gaining on Sanders, setting up what could be an intense match-up for the progressive vote.

Allies say her policy positions will set her apart from Sanders. They are quick to highlight that there is daylight between Warren and Sanders on issues including reparations, filibuster reform and even impeachment.

Warren and Sanders also handled the idea of a Fox News town hall differently. Sanders welcomed the offer, appearing on the cable network last month while making an appeal to independents and disenfranchised Republicans.

This week, Warren rejected her invitation from the cable network, hammering it on Twitter as a “hate-for-profit racket that gives a megaphone to racists and conspiracists.”

“From 30,000 feet, it looks like they’re competing in the same lane, but in actuality, they’re quite different, not just in terms of some policy but in terms of style, approach and the way they’re conducting their campaigns,” one Warren ally said of Warren and Sanders.

There’s still a big difference between Warren’s poll numbers and Biden’s.

A Gravis poll from April 17 and April 18 in Iowa had Biden and Sanders at 19 percent, compared to 14 percent for South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg and 6 percent for Warren and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.).

A Monmouth poll earlier this month in New Hampshire also had Biden in first place with 36 percent and Sanders in second with 18 percent. Warren was fourth at 8 percent, 1 percentage point behind Buttigieg and ahead of Harris.

While allies are convinced she’s on an upward trajectory, they say the perception some have that she can’t defeat Trump is a problem.

“There’s this notion this cycle that a man is the only one who can take on Trump,” the ally said. “I think a lot of people also believe that she only speaks to progressives, but I think if you pay attention to what she’s saying, she’s speaking to a lot of different people.

“I think she’s going to have to make the electability case in no uncertain terms,” the ally said. “She’s going to have to spell out why she’s the one who can take on Trump.”

Nonetheless, a sense of optimism has returned to the Warren camp in recent weeks even as Biden’s entry into the race has set him up as its clear front-runner.

Her supporters hope that as more and more voters tune in to the campaign, she will reel Biden and Sanders in.

“I never have to ask myself whose side she's on,” said Adam Parkhomenko, a Democratic strategist who has served as a longtime aide to Hillary Clinton. “She’s gotten out in front of a lot of big things. You ask her if she supports impeachment, she says yes. You ask her for details on her policies, she takes the time to explain it to you. I think she’s pretty straightforward. A lot of these people have 'proposals' but there’s not much to them.”

“She’s the opposite of that,” he said.

In short, Warren is laying out detailed policy proposals, trending in the right direction in polls, and appears to be slowly but steadily eating into Sanders' base as she successfully outflanks him on the Left on various key issues.

Edit: I do think we're seeing the problem here I was afraid of if both Sanders and Warren won- they're splitting the progressive vote between them, likely ensuring Biden gets the nomination. I think that the only way that's likely to be realistically avoidable, short of a massive scandal hitting Biden, is if either Warren or Bernie is effectively knocked out quickly- after Iowa or New Hampshire at the latest. And at this point, I honestly hope its Bernie who gets knocked out. Warren got in first, and Bernie should have put cause before his own ambitions and endorsed her, rather than splitting the progressive vote like this.

[The Romulan Republic]

Joe Biden goes full "Both Sides" on angry progressives, accuses them of being equivalent to Trumpers because they're "divisive" (read: not nice enough to/willing to compromise with fascists):

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/biden-dem ... -1.5142034

His party may be enraged by Donald Trump's presidency, but Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden insisted Saturday that Democrats will not defeat the Republican president if they pick an angry nominee.

Facing thousands of voters in his native Pennsylvania for the second time as a 2020 contender, the former vice-president offered a call for bipartisan unity that seemed far more aimed at a general election audience than the fiery Democratic activists most active in the presidential primary process. He acknowledged, however, that some believe Democrats should nominate a candidate who can tap into their party's anti-Trump anger.

"That's what they are saying you have to do to win the Democratic nomination. Well, I don't believe it," Biden declared. "I believe Democrats want to unify this nation. That's what the party's always been about. That's what it's always been about. Unity."

Biden's moderate message highlights his chief advantage and chief liability in the early days of the nascent presidential contest, which has so far been defined by fierce resistance to Trump on the left and equally aggressive vitriol on the right. Biden's centrist approach may help him win over independents, but it threatens to alienate liberals who favour a more aggressive approach in policy and personality to counter Trump's turbulent presidency.

"I want aggressive change. I'm not hearing that from him yet," said 45-year-old Jennifer Moyer of Blandon, Pennsylvania, who attended Biden's rally and said she's 90 per cent sold on his candidacy. "I don't want middle of the road."

The event was the culmination of a three-week campaign rollout that began and ended in Pennsylvania, home to Biden's campaign headquarters and where he was brought up. The 76-year-old native of working-class Scranton, Pennsylvania, has climbed to the front of the crowded primary field, in part by ignoring his Democratic rivals and focusing on his ability to compete with Trump head-to-head next year.

In the fight to deny Trump re-election, no states will matter more than Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, three states the Republican president carried by razor-thin margins in 2016.

Biden is betting big that voters in the Midwest and beyond will ultimately embrace his optimistic appeal.

That's far from certain.

Biden's campaign security team estimated that the Saturday event, which closed down a Philadelphia thoroughfare and attracted a huge police presence, drew an estimated 6,000 people. Compared with events held by some of his top rivals — and certainly Trump's rallies — the crowd was large, but not overwhelming.

Biden's rally in Philadelphia on Saturday was his first large-scale campaign rally after doing smaller events in Iowa and New Hampshire in the past few weeks.

Some in his party's energized left wing, watching from afar, were skeptical of Biden's strength atop the field and his message of unity.

"It's hard to imagine how Joe Biden is not angry," said Adam Green, co-founder of the liberal group known as the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which has long supported Elizabeth Warren's presidential ambitions.

"Has he been living in the Trump era? Kids are being torn away from their mothers' arms at the border," Green continued. "It's completely legitimate to have righteous outrage at this horrible Trump moment in history, and to want a candidate who will channel that anger toward positive change."

It was easy to see signs of anger in recent days as Biden courted Democratic primary voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina as part of his inaugural national tour. At a house party in New Hampshire earlier in the week, Biden took a question from a woman who called Trump "an illegitimate president" and said he should be impeached.

Biden jokingly asked if she'd be his running mate, before shifting the conversation to another topic. A spokesperson later said Biden does not believe Trump is an illegitimate president.

Ahead in the polls in the early days of the 2020 contest, Biden is unlikely to embrace a more aggressive approach in the near future.

Referencing the health care fight under former President Barack Obama, he noted Saturday that he knows how to win "a bare-knuckle fight," but later added, "We need to stop fighting and start fixing."

"If the American people want a president to add to our division, to lead with a clenched fist, closed hand and a hard heart, to demonize the opponents and spew hatred — they don't need me. They've got President Donald Trump," he continued. "I am running to offer our country — Democrats, Republicans and independents — a different path."

Before he took the stage, longtime admirer Bradley Skelcher, of Smyrna, Delaware, praised the former vice-president's optimistic message. But he described himself as "damn angry" about the Trump presidency.

"We need calm. You don't want anybody like me running the country," Skelcher said. "Somebody needs to calm us down a little."

Morally, I can't justify going third party if Biden's the nominee, given what the stakes are. But boy, do I wish I could. What a gutless sack of shit, and what despicable, stupidly self-destructive contempt for his own party's base.

[FaxModem1]

Sanders makes a case against Biden, "It's not enough' to just defeat Trump: NBC News

Sanders: It's 'not good enough' just to defeat Trump in 2020
The Democratic presidential candidate hit back against Joe Biden's claims that he is best positioned to defeat the president next fall.



Full Sanders: 'We're going to try to transform the United States of America'
MAY 19, 201914:00
May 19, 2019, 9:25 AM CDT
By Ben Kamisar
WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., argued Sunday that his candidacy has the potential to energize and transform the Democratic Party on issues like climate change, saying that it's “not good enough” for the party to nominate a candidate just to defeat President Donald Trump in 2020.

Appearing on "Meet the Press," Sanders hit back at former Vice President Joe Biden’s argument, delivered Saturday during a campaign rally in Philadelphia, that the “most important plank” of his environmental policy is to “beat Trump.”

“Beating Trump is not good enough. You have to beat the fossil fuel industry, you have to take on all the forces of the status quo who do not want to move this country to energy efficiency and sustainable energy,” he said.

“Taking on Trump? Of course you’ve got to do that. But you need a real plan to transform our energy system.”

Calling Trump "the most dangerous president in the modern history of this country," Sanders said that he brings a different coalition to the ballot box around his progressive agenda on issues like health care, education and wages.

"We're going to create the kind of excitement that we need to bring out the large voter turnout," Sanders said. "The truth is that our campaign, I think, can generate that excitement."

It's a debate that underscores the differences in approach between Sanders and Biden. The former vice president recently told reporters in New Hampshire that he expects bipartisanship to return to Washington once Trump leaves office.

"You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends," Biden said.

"If we can't change it, we're in trouble. This nation cannot function without generating consensus."

When he addressed climate change during his Saturday rally, he argued that the solution to the "existential crisis" is cooperation.

"We need to set the most aggressive goals as soon as possible. But we have to work together to get it done," Biden said.

Sanders on Sunday made the case for more sweeping changes.

“Our campaign has a different goal — to transform this country," Sanders. "And we are taking on the entire establishment when we do that.”

Sanders and his allies have sought to draw a contrast to the former vice president as they take on the political establishment. The two men have topped virtually every poll of the Democratic presidential field.

But while Sanders blasts establishment Democrats for thinking too small, embedded in Biden's argument about the need to defeat Trump is the idea that some in the party have that Sanders' progressive platform is too far to the left to win in a general election.

Sanders dismissed that notion during his interview, as well as the question of whether his defeat in 2016 to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton shows he can’t capture the party’s nomination.

“We took on the entire Democratic establishment — we took on the Democratic National Committee, we took on every Democratic governor, we took on every Democratic mayor, and we ended up winning 22 states and 13 million votes, and in fact bringing forth an agenda that transformed the Democratic party,” he said.

Sanders is drawing a line in the sand, he's about more than defeating Trump, he's the candidate who is about transforming the country.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yup, Biden v Sanders is looking to be a repeat of Clinton vs Sanders, except this time Clinton has a penis, and we'll have had four years to see how bad Trump actually is. We'll see if either of those things makes a difference (the first one shouldn't, but probably will).

Also, its remarkable how fast Biden is blowing any good will he might have had as Obama's VP.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I literally said this was my worry on page 4 of this very thread and you accused me of spreading Trumpist talking points. So ... yeah.

[The Romulan Republic]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going Bernie or Bust or saying, and I still will vote for Biden if he is the nominee, and I still think stirring up those divisions more than they have been is a generally bad idea, because fuck fascism above all else.

Its more just depression on my part at how willing many in both wings of the party seem to be to reenact the cluster fuck of 2016. But I think what we're seeing here, again, is that its not just Bernie supporters who are "divisive" (even though they're the ones who are always condemned for it). There are Centrists who are every bit as petty and divisive.

[The Romulan Republic]

Mind you, polling aside, I still don't think Biden is a foregone conclusion at this point as the nominee. He's doing well now because he just got in, he has higher name recognition than anyone else except maybe Bernie, he's well-connected, and he can to some extent still ride Obama's coattails. Now, that was basically the case for Hillary too, except the difference is that Hillary was widely regarded as heir apparent from long before beginning to run, and she only had one serious competitor in the end (Bernie). Biden, meanwhile, is running against a much larger field. That might help him, splitting the opposition while he coasts on name recognition and connections. But it also means that people are going to know from the get-go that they have real, serious alternatives to him, and that there will be a LOT of powerful people working hard to drag him down. Being the front-runner also paints a target on you, and right now Biden has got to be target number one of everyone else.

Of course the downside to that is that if Biden pulls it off anyway, we'll get a badly bruised nominee and potentially a bitterly-divided party.

Its just a damn shame Warren and Bernie are both running. Combine their votes, minus perhaps a few percent who would only vote for one or the other, and you've got a real challenge to Biden's numbers.