2020 Democrats

[Flying Hellfish]

Warren had the best night in the debate by FAR, although it's pretty likely to be too little to late.  

Pete and Amy seemed like the brother and sister who hate each other at the kids table during the holidays!  While shitting on each other they virtually left Bernie alone!

Biden at least didn't shit the bed but he didn't land any hits and didn't do anything to enhance his electability argument.  He isn't polling great and isn't in a great position to win NV.  Biden isn't going to be able to afford to compete in Super Tuesday even if he does manage to win SC.  With SC being only 3 days before ST Biden won't have time to get any momentum or donations or ads up for ST.  Biden is a dead man walking!

Bloomber got utterly destroyed!  I was actually shocked when he announced he would show up at the debate.  I suspect his narcissism told him he could go out there and word fuck the whole world cause he smarter than everyone else.  Anyone thinking a racist neocon can run as a democrat and win against Trump is crazy!  No mater how much money Bloomberg spends he will suppress the base more than enough to ensure a Trump win.

Bernie had a good night, he didn't land any spectacular blows but he is the front runner and had Bloomberg as a human shield and the other dems left him alone to spin his message as he wants too, for the most part!

20 million viewers of the debate last night, it set a record (most viewers of a primary debate I think).  I don't think Warren will feel much effect from a good performance last night as there are as many early votes in NV (first time allowing early votes) as there were in all of 2016, a lot of votes cast before the debate took place.

Since I want a contested convention, I'm hoping that someone other than Sanders wins Nevada, though I'm not sure who that'd be. Maybe Biden can pull it off? He had a decent debate performance.

Even when Bernie wins NV there is still a decent chance of no one having a majority in Milwaukee.  

I think the biggest part of the debate last night is something the msm isn't covering too much.  The 5 candidates who all said they would be OK with taking the nom away from the person with a plurality of delegates.  No rational person that thinks they will have the plurality would say yes to that question, they all know full well (except Bernie of course) they are not getting to Milwaukee with a plurality or they would be like FUCK NO of course the person with a plurality should win it.  The stench of panic from the establishment and the msm is over powering, if they steal the nom by giving it to some one without the plurality they risk a generation of young democrats (Millenials and Zoomers) being disenfranchised and the US will have GOP presidents for the foreseeable future...  Imagine trying to sell this shit burger (and the msm will try to sell it ALL DAY LONG) "The person with the most delegates shouldn't be the nominee so we will give it to the person that LESS people wanted and has less delegates.  Voters will swallow some pretty big shit burgers but that one seems like a bridge to far with Millenials and Zoomers!

As I said in an early post if there is one organization stupid enough to not see this (or ignore it) it is without a doubt the DNC.  Or perhaps they do see it and absolutely don't give a fuck as Trump is better than Bernie for the neolibs

[1715204760]

1715204760

[1715204760]

1715204760

[1715204760]

1715204760

[1715204760]

1715204760

[1715204760]

1715204760

[theymos]

The stench of panic from the establishment and the msm is over powering, if they steal the nom by giving it to some one without the plurality they risk a generation of young democrats (Millenials and Zoomers) being disenfranchised and the US will have GOP presidents for the foreseeable future...  Imagine trying to sell this shit burger (and the msm will try to sell it ALL DAY LONG) "The person with the most delegates shouldn't be the nominee so we will give it to the person that LESS people wanted and has less delegates.  Voters will swallow some pretty big shit burgers but that one seems like a bridge to far with Millenials and Zoomers!

That's what I'm hoping for.

In my early teens (under G.W. Bush), I was very supportive of the Democrats. Partly this was because I was an idiot at the time, but partly it was for good reasons: the Democrats were pro-civil-liberties, pro-free-speech, anti-war, etc. The Democrats of that era at least gave the perception of "live and let live" (+ various welfare programs). Now, though, the Democrats have basically become the same as the religious, control-everyone's-lives neocons of the Dubya era, but with a weird "woke" religion replacing Christian fundamentalism. They are pro-war, authoritarian, anti-free-speech, supportive of the out-of-control semi-dictatorial administrative state, etc. I don't like the Republicans, but at least they have a bit of a pro-freedom philosophy buried somewhere within them. The Democrats on the other hand have become completely worthless from my perspective.

If the nomination is stolen from Bernie, then the Democratic party will implode. Nature abhors a vacuum, though, and we will not see the Republicans win every single race from now until the end of time. Instead, in 4-8 years we will hopefully see a completely changed Democratic party, and I'm hoping that this will be a more worthwhile one. Probably it won't be one that I particularly approve of, and maybe it'll be even worse than now, but I'd like to roll those dice and hope for an improvement.

(I also just enjoy seeing chaos in government/politics...)

[TECSHARE]

Since this subforum is moderated by a censorious communist, and reports are being used as a form of harassment and censorship in lieu of having a debate they are incapable of winning, I need to repost these here as they were removed:



https://politics.theonion.com/bloomberg-hires-thousands-of-canvassers-to-stop-black-m-1841701859?

In order to avoid being censored by the resident communist overlord, I am required to explain this joke in stead of just allowing you to enjoy it. As you can see here there is a photo of a Mike Bloomberg campaigner stopping a black man to force him to listen to a pitch for his cantidacy for president. This is funny because Mike Bloomberg is well known for his controversial "stop and frisk" policy which has been accused to be a racist policy targeted at African Americans. I hope you enjoyed this explanation of a joke.




"Buttigieg Reveals Plan to Flood Small U.S. Towns With Immigration to 'Renew' Populations"

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61194

Here you can see a discussion of Pete Buttigieg's immigration policy, and his intent to flood rural America with immigration in a very transparent attempt to change the voting demographics of the area by force, much like has been done in Virginia. I should remind you, if you argue against this you are a racist.



Suddenly, a wild Killery approaches...

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/bloomberg-considers-hillary-running-mate

Here you have another removed post, this time discussing the prospects of Mike Bloomberg choosing Hillary Clinton as his running mate. In the extremely unlikely event he does win, I predict he will quickly commit suicide, leaving Hillary Clinton as president.



"The Myth Of Incompetence: DNC Scandals Are A Feature, Not A Bug"

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the-myth-of-incompetence-dnc-scandals-are-a-feature-not-a-bug-4f264352d4f7

Here we have a discussion about how the DNC is corrupt, and the pattern of failures within it are proposed to be intentional and a result of fraud, and not simply incompetence. I think the DNC has made it pretty clear they are willing to commit fraud, because it is the only way they have a chance. Leftists are fond of false pretenses, much like our censorious communist overlord Flying Hellfish.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fkYHwU74M4

Here we have another clearly well adjusted Democrat voter. Yet one more example in a long line of examples of the totally insane and violent behavior of the left. This man approaches a table of Trump supporters, and proceeds to scream at them that president Trump and all Republicans should have their throats slashed.


"Powerful American stories ripped to shreds by Nancy Pelosi"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b93zMpwc2B0

Here we have another joke, which I am obligated to explain under threat of censorship. Here we have video of Nacy Pelosi embarrassing herself by ripping up the president's state of the union speech. It is edited to juxtapose her behavior with all the great people that were lauded within the speech, and how disrespectful her actions were to them.


Thank you for reading my posts and the explanation of jokes as required by communist law which rules this subforum. I hope you enjoyed them.

[DireWolfM14]

I think the biggest part of the debate last night is something the msm isn't covering too much.  The 5 candidates who all said they would be OK with taking the nom away from the person with a plurality of delegates.  No rational person that thinks they will have the plurality would say yes to that question, they all know full well (except Bernie of course) they are not getting to Milwaukee with a plurality or they would be like FUCK NO of course the person with a plurality should win it.

It's getting painfully obvious that the DNC is panicking.  The fact that they let Bloomberg on the debate stage is a sign of their panic.  He's not even on the Nevada ballot, yet there he was, having bought himself a $420,000 pedestal, and it didn't even come with a box.

I think Buttigieg planted the seed, when he talked about giving the nomination to a "real Democrat."  I'm pretty sure he was specifically referring to Sanders, who isn't a real Democrat, and the DNC isn't likely to give him the nomination.  Or, lets just say that I don't believe they will.

The other very interesting thing I'm seeing since the last debate; the story about the leaked information that Russia is melding in a way that may help Bernie.  It's the same stories we've heard about Trump.  The same tactics they used to discredit Trump are being employed against Bernie.  They fear Sanders for the same reason they fear Trump, neither care to propagate the swamp, and want to end the status quo of the Ruling Class.

The similarities are striking, and I hope they don't go unnoticed.  Remember, Trump was not particularly popular within the Republican party, and still has his detractors within those ranks.  The criticism against him was also largely similar, i.e. he's not a real Republican.

If one positive comes from this I hope it will be that Liberals finally see the MSM for what they truly are; the propaganda arm of the DNC.  Even if you are a Democrat I hope you can see this for the clear and present danger which it is.

If the nomination is stolen from Bernie, then the Democratic party will implode. Nature abhors a vacuum, though, and we will not see the Republicans win every single race from now until the end of time. Instead, in 4-8 years we will hopefully see a completely changed Democratic party, and I'm hoping that this will be a more worthwhile one. Probably it won't be one that I particularly approve of, and maybe it'll be even worse than now, but I'd like to roll those dice and hope for an improvement.

Even though Sanders is winning the vote counts, i don't think his vision of a socialist America is all that popular with most Democrats.  There's a wide field of moderate Democrats in this race, and combined they are getting far more votes than Bernie.  It doesn't solve the issue you laid out, but I think the DNC will use that as an excuse to give the nomination to someone else.

I don't think the Democrat's current direction is particularly helpful.  They need to move away from being the "Trump Opposition" party and start focusing on the things that matter to Americans.  If only they could just accept the results of the 2016 election and move on...

[BADecker]

^^^ Possibly the biggest point about 2020 Democrats is that they are moving over to the Republican side in droves... especially since the impeachment went sour for them.

Once they move, they are not included in the Dem statistics any longer, so you won't hear about their thoughts as Democrats any longer.

[tvbcof]

The field is so abysmal and the DNC so dysfunctional, I wonder if by ballot time 2020 most mainstream Democrats would be at the point of saying 'aw, fuck it' were the election to 'need' to be canceled for some reason.

I mean, that attitude would be helpful relative to one in which the Dems felt sorely cheated over a candidate that was broadly acceptable to them (and I doubt that Bernie will ever fit that description.)

[Flying Hellfish]

If the nomination is stolen from Bernie, then the Democratic party will implode. Nature abhors a vacuum, though, and we will not see the Republicans win every single race from now until the end of time.

The danger isn't in the dem's leaving a vacuum if the nom is "stolen" from Bernie, the party will continue on it's establishment neoliberal path replacing all progressive dissent as fast as possible.  The real problem for the party is they risk a certain percentage of the next generation of voters "checking out" of the political conversation.  Enough Millenials and Zoomers will feel like the system is so rigged their vote doesn't matter (and they would be right) and will not waste their time and energy voting for a while.  It won't necessarily be all or even a majority but even disenfranchising 10% of them into non voters is the problem.  The GOP has the electoral advantage, if the dems push enough new voters out of the game they could start to lose the states they have been making in roads into.  The risk is that the dems make the swing states no longer swing states by pushing out only a small amount of a generation.  Pushing a state like Florida that is always a 1-2% state either way red by 5%.  Instead of closing the gap in Texas they push it another 5-10% back to red.  These problems will take several cycles to gain back the road they lost in 1 cycle.

Clearly stealing the nom won't ensure Republican wins everything for ever, only a GOP dictator could ensure that happens.  And of course we can't predict the future, but I think a reasonable argument can be made that it will ensure a second trump term and make it much easier for a GOP POTUS in 2024 and if that person isn't a 1 term president than that puts the GOP in control for the next 12 years (half a generation).

If the dems want to risk increasing the odds the will have to wait until 2032 all to stop Bernie now then they should steal the nom.  If they want a chance in 2020 and beyond they should let the candidate with the most delegates be the nomination

[TECSHARE]

It looks like the left is getting a taste of its own medicine. Conservatives have long been warning this unjust extrajudicial witch hunt would eventually be turned on its supporters too, but they were too busy frothing at the mouth over the prospect of "getting Trump" to consider that. Now it is your turn to enjoy the Russian collusion hysteria.

https://bracingviews.com/2020/02/22/smearing-bernie-sanders/

[suchmoon]

Bernie has dominated Nevada - nearly 50% albeit still counting. Whatever DNC conspiracy might be going on it doesn't look very successful so far. Biden in distant second place with ~20% and Pete (third) is complaining about "irregularities".

[TECSHARE]

"High school history lesson compares Trump with Nazis, communists"

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/23/loch-raven-high-school-history-lesson-compares-don/

I hear they have plans to hand out free clothing too for their newly forming youth groups. I hear the shirts are a nice shade of brown.

[DireWolfM14]

Bernie has dominated Nevada - nearly 50% albeit still counting. Whatever DNC conspiracy might be going on it doesn't look very successful so far. Biden in distant second place with ~20% and Pete (third) is complaining about "irregularities".

But will the DNC give him their nomination?  I don't know that they have to, regardless of whether he wins the majority of votes or not.  Anyway it was surprising to see Biden take second, albeit a distant second.  It'll definitely be interesting to see what happens on super Tuesday.

Interesting thing I noticed while looking up the results on google; as the graphic below shows 60% tally is in, but only 7,652 people voted in the Democratic primary, which seems rather low.  I don't know if they mean 60% of the counties have reported, and Clark County (Nevada's most populous by a large margin) might not be among them?

[suchmoon]

Interesting thing I noticed while looking up the results on google; as the graphic below shows 60% tally is in, but only 7,652 people voted in the Democratic primary, which seems rather low.  I don't know if they mean 60% of the counties have reported, and Clark County (Nevada's most populous by a large margin) might not be among them?

"Votes displayed are county convention delegates"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Nevada_Democratic_caucuses

There are ~15000 total county convention delegates.

Actual individual vote count is ~60k at this time so it might reach ~100k when everything is counted.

[Quickseller]

Trump appears to be fanning the flames ahead of time of the angry Sanders' supporters tweeting that Bernie should not let the DNC take the nomination away (again).

There was also a smear "leaked" that Russia was backing Sanders to win the nomination, however Trump strongly implied this is not true when he asked why no one has told him that.

[1miau]

...

There was also a smear "leaked" that Russia was backing Sanders to win the nomination, however Trump strongly implied this is not true when he asked why no one has told him that.

Did someone notice that the Trump supporter scammer is advertising a crypto scamsite called "elonbet" 

LOL xD



Archived: http://archive.is/o9jNB

 

[squatz1]

I think the biggest part of the debate last night is something the msm isn't covering too much.  The 5 candidates who all said they would be OK with taking the nom away from the person with a plurality of delegates.  No rational person that thinks they will have the plurality would say yes to that question, they all know full well (except Bernie of course) they are not getting to Milwaukee with a plurality or they would be like FUCK NO of course the person with a plurality should win it.  The stench of panic from the establishment and the msm is over powering, if they steal the nom by giving it to some one without the plurality they risk a generation of young democrats (Millenials and Zoomers) being disenfranchised and the US will have GOP presidents for the foreseeable future...  Imagine trying to sell this shit burger (and the msm will try to sell it ALL DAY LONG) "The person with the most delegates shouldn't be the nominee so we will give it to the person that LESS people wanted and has less delegates.  Voters will swallow some pretty big shit burgers but that one seems like a bridge to far with Millenials and Zoomers!

As I said in an early post if there is one organization stupid enough to not see this (or ignore it) it is without a doubt the DNC.  Or perhaps they do see it and absolutely don't give a fuck as Trump is better than Bernie for the neolibs

I think this part was to be expected. The people who aren't the frontrunners (by a long shot) are going to support a brokered convention taking things away from the frontrunner. Is it bullshit and undemocratic? Yes. But is that what the DNC is going to try to do? Yes.

Don't forget folks, the DNC STILL HAS superdelagates -- they're just only allowed to vote if no one wins on first ballot. That means that 750 (somewhere in this realm) delegates could vote on the 2nd ballot to steal the nomination from the frontrunner, presumably Bernie.

Bernie has dominated Nevada - nearly 50% albeit still counting. Whatever DNC conspiracy might be going on it doesn't look very successful so far. Biden in distant second place with ~20% and Pete (third) is complaining about "irregularities".

But will the DNC give him their nomination?  I don't know that they have to, regardless of whether he wins the majority of votes or not.  Anyway it was surprising to see Biden take second, albeit a distant second.  It'll definitely be interesting to see what happens on super Tuesday.

Interesting thing I noticed while looking up the results on google; as the graphic below shows 60% tally is in, but only 7,652 people voted in the Democratic primary, which seems rather low.  I don't know if they mean 60% of the counties have reported, and Clark County (Nevada's most populous by a large margin) might not be among them?

I'm pretty sure most delegates are forced to vote for their candidate on the first ballot (if their candidate is still running that is) So that's not something they can pull on first ballot, but on second ballot it can be done with ease. Campaigns can use backdoor deals to gain the delegates they need.

The stench of panic from the establishment and the msm is over powering, if they steal the nom by giving it to some one without the plurality they risk a generation of young democrats (Millenials and Zoomers) being disenfranchised and the US will have GOP presidents for the foreseeable future...  Imagine trying to sell this shit burger (and the msm will try to sell it ALL DAY LONG) "The person with the most delegates shouldn't be the nominee so we will give it to the person that LESS people wanted and has less delegates.  Voters will swallow some pretty big shit burgers but that one seems like a bridge to far with Millenials and Zoomers!

That's what I'm hoping for.

In my early teens (under G.W. Bush), I was very supportive of the Democrats. Partly this was because I was an idiot at the time, but partly it was for good reasons: the Democrats were pro-civil-liberties, pro-free-speech, anti-war, etc. The Democrats of that era at least gave the perception of "live and let live" (+ various welfare programs). Now, though, the Democrats have basically become the same as the religious, control-everyone's-lives neocons of the Dubya era, but with a weird "woke" religion replacing Christian fundamentalism. They are pro-war, authoritarian, anti-free-speech, supportive of the out-of-control semi-dictatorial administrative state, etc. I don't like the Republicans, but at least they have a bit of a pro-freedom philosophy buried somewhere within them. The Democrats on the other hand have become completely worthless from my perspective.

If the nomination is stolen from Bernie, then the Democratic party will implode. Nature abhors a vacuum, though, and we will not see the Republicans win every single race from now until the end of time. Instead, in 4-8 years we will hopefully see a completely changed Democratic party, and I'm hoping that this will be a more worthwhile one. Probably it won't be one that I particularly approve of, and maybe it'll be even worse than now, but I'd like to roll those dice and hope for an improvement.

(I also just enjoy seeing chaos in government/politics...)

I wouldn't say the party would implode, but it would be the best time for a third political party to pick up some of the voters from the Bernie coalition. I know there'd be riots in the streets if this was the case, but I personally can't see an entire party going down for this -- the DNC is still huge and hugely powerful.

Don't we all enjoy seeing a bit of chaos.

[TECSHARE]

The two party system isn't broken, it should be preserved for a very good reason. It was designed to cause constant conflict so that politicians would spend most of their time fighting each other, and less time cooperating to fuck the general population. Furthermore introducing a third party would allow the votes from the two main parties to be divided enough to create the potential for an extremist minority to take control. Just look at what a disaster the multiparty system has been in various parts of Europe.

[BADecker]

The good of a two-party system is that it will always give us an elected leader that is upheld by  real majority.

One problem of the two-party system is that the majority will often only be slightly in favor of the leader they vote for. They vote the way they do because they are voting against the other person.

Another problem is that smart politicians are almost forced to manipulate the people is such ways that there will always be a near 50/50 vote. If a politician is lucky, he might get greater than the near 50/50. But anybody running for a major office who can manipulate into a greater than 50/50, will be rich with regards to his capability. He won't want something as depressing as a government leader job.

A system of multiple parties will keep the people feeling mixed up, but will be far more honest. However, laws might have to be changed so that a multiple party system can even get a leader elected... because no candidate will have a large enough majority to show that he represents enough of the people.

With the above paragraphs in mind, it is easily seen that in a large country, there is no really good process for finding a proper leader. So, we limp along with a partially democratic government, that is actually run by policy makers who are not directly in the 3 Constitutionally mandated positions of Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

[TECSHARE]

[squatz1]

The two party system isn't broken, it should be preserved for a very good reason. It was designed to cause constant conflict so that politicians would spend most of their time fighting each other, and less time cooperating to fuck the general population. Furthermore introducing a third party would allow the votes from the two main parties to be divided enough to create the potential for an extremist minority to take control. Just look at what a disaster the multiparty system has been in various parts of Europe.

The two party system isn't broken, its just flawed.

My next portion of this is all theory and all something that'd been drawn up in my brain. At the moment we have a two parties, yes, but I do think that there is a uniparty. The two parties argue about the stuff that the voters worry about: abortion rights, gun rights, minor tax law changes, administrative changes, criminal law changes, etc.

But the uni party ALWAYS agrees with one another in ensuring that it is hard for a third party to grow. They'll do everything in their power to limit that -- increasing the number of signature you need to be on the ballot, making elections a regulatory mess, etc -- they'll continue to pass things that both of them love and want to do: the growth of government, surveillance of the people, stuff along those lines.

[TECSHARE]

The two party system isn't broken, its just flawed.

My next portion of this is all theory and all something that'd been drawn up in my brain. At the moment we have a two parties, yes, but I do think that there is a uniparty. The two parties argue about the stuff that the voters worry about: abortion rights, gun rights, minor tax law changes, administrative changes, criminal law changes, etc.

But the uni party ALWAYS agrees with one another in ensuring that it is hard for a third party to grow. They'll do everything in their power to limit that -- increasing the number of signature you need to be on the ballot, making elections a regulatory mess, etc -- they'll continue to pass things that both of them love and want to do: the growth of government, surveillance of the people, stuff along those lines.

I never made the claim it was perfect, simply that it exists for as very logical reason that most people do not take into account. On certain issues there certainly does exist some sort of collaboration to screw the general population. Unfortunately this would exist regardless of us having 2 parties or 30. The only difference is the nation would be only more Balkanized making it easier to control. Divide and conquer. Furthermore this process could be accelerated by making it possible to introduce a more extremist minority to power. Changes definitely are needed, but this is by no means a simple problem. We should be careful that our "solutions" don't regress our society rather than progress our society.