Election 2020
- McParadigm
- NEVER STOP JAMMING!
- Posts: 22393
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Re: Election 2020
The reality of the matter is, the way the rules are currently written...it takes greater than 50% to win. So the question is reasonable, because it’s increasingly likely that nobody is going to win according to the rules as written.
What bothers me is that this problem is a result of the Democratic establishment’s noncommittal, insecurity-based approach to this nomination process. They have let their own worry over electability, the viability of blue collar whites, Trumpism, and the progressive-vs-donor class fight lead them to qualification rules that kept too many people on the debate stage too far into the game, and prevented the field from being culled such that it’s doubtful someone COULD win 50%. “Should the rules change because of that mess” isn’t a question for candidates. It’s not remotely for them to say. It *shouldn’t* be for them to say. They’re the ones racing.
Every person on that stage would be a fool to say “yeah, let someone win with 38% if that’s the most anyone gets,” except Sanders, who’d be a fool not to. That’s literally the reason why they don’t get to decide it, and why it’s not worth asking them.
What bothers me is that this problem is a result of the Democratic establishment’s noncommittal, insecurity-based approach to this nomination process. They have let their own worry over electability, the viability of blue collar whites, Trumpism, and the progressive-vs-donor class fight lead them to qualification rules that kept too many people on the debate stage too far into the game, and prevented the field from being culled such that it’s doubtful someone COULD win 50%. “Should the rules change because of that mess” isn’t a question for candidates. It’s not remotely for them to say. It *shouldn’t* be for them to say. They’re the ones racing.
Every person on that stage would be a fool to say “yeah, let someone win with 38% if that’s the most anyone gets,” except Sanders, who’d be a fool not to. That’s literally the reason why they don’t get to decide it, and why it’s not worth asking them.
(patriotic choking noises)
- verb_to_trust
- Gone
- Posts: 24014
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
- Location: Illinois
Re: Election 2020
What about his performance last night keeps you in his camp? He was completely exposed for what he is.Bi_3 wrote:Also, I still support Bloomy. I'm just doubtful he can recover from that first hour gangbang.
Dick/Balls
- Bi_3
- 10Club Complaint Department
- Posts: 16452
- Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Re: Election 2020
One debate is one debate. Running the US is not about winning a 5 on 1 reality show contest, it's like running a Fortune 100 company (Bloomy built one) and I predominantly care about maintaining the American global dominance that Trump is systematically destroying. No one else up there (well, maybe ratface) is in that same camp, Sanders is clearly of the opposite view, so I'll stick with Bloomy until I pull the lever then vote for whomever the blue team puts up there.verb_to_trust wrote:What about his performance last night keeps you in his camp? He was completely exposed for what he is.Bi_3 wrote:Also, I still support Bloomy. I'm just doubtful he can recover from that first hour gangbang.
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
- Superblood Wolfmoon
- AnalLog
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Thu November 21, 2013 10:01 pm
Re: Election 2020
Shouldn’t a primary be exactly this? Especially in an election cycle when so much is at stake?McParadigm wrote:What bothers me is that this problem is a result of the Democratic establishment’s noncommittal, insecurity-based approach to this nomination process. They have let their own worry over electability, the viability of blue collar whites, Trumpism, and the progressive-vs-donor class fight lead them to qualification rules that kept too many people on the debate stage too far into the game, and prevented the field from being culled such that it’s doubtful someone COULD win 50%. “Should the rules change because of that mess” isn’t a question for candidates. It’s not remotely for them to say. It *shouldn’t* be for them to say. They’re the ones racing.
Every person on that stage would be a fool to say “yeah, let someone win with 38% if that’s the most anyone gets,” except Sanders, who’d be a fool not to. That’s literally the reason why they don’t get to decide it, and why it’s not worth asking them.
Trump suffered withering attacks from everyone during his primary and had no problem recovering and becoming president once he had the nomination.
In understand there’s a lot of anxiety on the blue team right now and a desire to get through the ugly primary process we knew it would be. But the process will play out as it will and once it’s one of these people vs. Trump these fractional support levels wont matter too much.
I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.
- Bi_3
- 10Club Complaint Department
- Posts: 16452
- Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Re: Election 2020
Unless they are "XXXX or bust" and in the general you lose the 5 states that actually matter because that fraction choose the later.Superblood Wolfmoon wrote:Shouldn’t a primary be exactly this? Especially in an election cycle when so much is at stake?McParadigm wrote:What bothers me is that this problem is a result of the Democratic establishment’s noncommittal, insecurity-based approach to this nomination process. They have let their own worry over electability, the viability of blue collar whites, Trumpism, and the progressive-vs-donor class fight lead them to qualification rules that kept too many people on the debate stage too far into the game, and prevented the field from being culled such that it’s doubtful someone COULD win 50%. “Should the rules change because of that mess” isn’t a question for candidates. It’s not remotely for them to say. It *shouldn’t* be for them to say. They’re the ones racing.
Every person on that stage would be a fool to say “yeah, let someone win with 38% if that’s the most anyone gets,” except Sanders, who’d be a fool not to. That’s literally the reason why they don’t get to decide it, and why it’s not worth asking them.
Trump suffered withering attacks from everyone during his primary and had no problem recovering and becoming president once he had the nomination.
In understand there’s a lot of anxiety on the blue team right now and a desire to get through the ugly primary process we knew it would be. But the process will play out as it will and once it’s one of these people vs. Trump these fractional support levels wont matter too much.
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
- Superblood Wolfmoon
- AnalLog
- Posts: 1867
- Joined: Thu November 21, 2013 10:01 pm
Re: Election 2020
That’s always a possibility but I’m hoping this time around the “XXXX or bust!” folks rethink their approach.
I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.
- bune
- Mind Your Tanners
- Posts: 9359
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:03 pm
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/bune_yurievich
- Location: Washington State
- E.H. Ruddock
- Guys, I am not a moderator! I swear to God! Why does everyone think I'm a moderator?
- Posts: 52027
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:48 pm
Re: Election 2020
ehh, uber will get me exactly where I want to go though. Fuck the bus that gets me close.
Clouuuuds Rolll byyy...BANG BANG BANG BANG
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: Election 2020
Does that analogy still work if the government purposely runs my car off the road in an effort to force me to take the bus? Kinda feel like I’d rather just stay home than swallow my dignity and ride their bus (or better yet, burn their bus and riot).
- Orpheus
- Future Drummer
- Posts: 2874
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 8:08 pm
Re: Election 2020
Bi_3 wrote:Orpheus wrote:Sources: b_i in shambles, driving around downtown Las Vegas begging (thru texts) for address to Bernie's ballot box
Bloomy was never the best option to beat Trump. This is something you made up in your head.
- verb_to_trust
- Gone
- Posts: 24014
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
- Location: Illinois
Re: Election 2020
Orpheus wrote:Bi_3 wrote:Orpheus wrote:Sources: b_i in shambles, driving around downtown Las Vegas begging (thru texts) for address to Bernie's ballot box
Bloomy was never the best option to beat Trump. This is something you made up in your head.
Seriously. That the RM Bloomberg Stans could watch Daddy fall on his fucking face the way he did last night and still act like he's a viable candidate is disturbing. It's the exact sort of confirmation bias you see from the MAGA cult.
Dick/Balls
- McParadigm
- NEVER STOP JAMMING!
- Posts: 22393
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am
Re: Election 2020
Its more like if your neighborhood was on fire, including your house, and the only escape vehicles to be found were busses. But the busses couldn’t run unless they were full, and you didn’t get the bus you wanted so you just went back inside with the fire and blamed everyone else for your subsequent problems.LoathedVermin72 wrote:Does that analogy still work if the government purposely runs my car off the road in an effort to force me to take the bus? Kinda feel like I’d rather just stay home than swallow my dignity and ride their bus (or better yet, burn their bus and riot).
(patriotic choking noises)
-
JuanHamm
- Misplaced My Sponge
- Posts: 6950
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:10 pm
Re: Election 2020
Maybe if the bus drivers helped start the fire and are evacuating you to a building that's slightly less on fireMcParadigm wrote:Its more like if your neighborhood was on fire, including your house, and the only escape vehicles to be found were busses. But the busses couldn’t run unless they were full, and you didn’t get the bus you wanted so you just went back inside with the fire and blamed everyone else for your subsequent problems.LoathedVermin72 wrote:Does that analogy still work if the government purposely runs my car off the road in an effort to force me to take the bus? Kinda feel like I’d rather just stay home than swallow my dignity and ride their bus (or better yet, burn their bus and riot).
Nihilist lives don't matter
- LoathedVermin72
- The Master
- Posts: 33961
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Re: Election 2020
Are you referring to every election or is this just Trump hysteria?McParadigm wrote:Its more like if your neighborhood was on fire, including your house, and the only escape vehicles to be found were busses. But the busses couldn’t run unless they were full, and you didn’t get the bus you wanted so you just went back inside with the fire and blamed everyone else for your subsequent problems.LoathedVermin72 wrote:Does that analogy still work if the government purposely runs my car off the road in an effort to force me to take the bus? Kinda feel like I’d rather just stay home than swallow my dignity and ride their bus (or better yet, burn their bus and riot).
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 46240
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
-
JuanHamm
- Misplaced My Sponge
- Posts: 6950
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 6:10 pm
- Bi_3
- 10Club Complaint Department
- Posts: 16452
- Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Re: Election 2020
Almost as bad as believing we can add over $60T in spending this decade without ending up like Venezuela. Almost.verb_to_trust wrote:Orpheus wrote:Bi_3 wrote:Orpheus wrote:Sources: b_i in shambles, driving around downtown Las Vegas begging (thru texts) for address to Bernie's ballot box
Bloomy was never the best option to beat Trump. This is something you made up in your head.
Seriously. That the RM Bloomberg Stans could watch Daddy fall on his fucking face the way he did last night and still act like he's a viable candidate is disturbing. It's the exact sort of confirmation bias you see from the MAGA cult.
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
- verb_to_trust
- Gone
- Posts: 24014
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 10:53 pm
- Location: Illinois
Re: Election 2020
Bi_3 wrote:Almost as bad as believing we can add over $60T in spending this decade without ending up like Venezuela. Almost.verb_to_trust wrote:Orpheus wrote:Bi_3 wrote:Orpheus wrote:Sources: b_i in shambles, driving around downtown Las Vegas begging (thru texts) for address to Bernie's ballot box
Bloomy was never the best option to beat Trump. This is something you made up in your head.
Seriously. That the RM Bloomberg Stans could watch Daddy fall on his fucking face the way he did last night and still act like he's a viable candidate is disturbing. It's the exact sort of confirmation bias you see from the MAGA cult.
BL3 is the kind of guy who has a Blue Cross Blue Shield tramp stamp.
Dick/Balls
- 96583UP
- The Master
- Posts: 29891
- Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Re: Election 2020
Agree. The real story here should already be how ridiculous the DNC process is. This is why Bloomy seems relatively unfazed following last night’s beatdown. And he already is running damage control on The View (which is now a more civilized venue for discussion than the DNC debates hilariously)Rob wrote:That last question of the debate is bugging me. Why have we listened to democrats say for 3 years that the person with the most votes should win, but when it comes to their own nomination process, that shouldn’t apply? I mean, if one person had 30% and another 28%, ok, that’s close and maybe there should be a process. But it sounded to me like they just flat out rejected the idea that the winner is the one with the most votes.
From Page 196:
McParadigm wrote:What do we think the odds are, if Bernie gets the nom, that centrists of both parties work together to run a third candidate? Who would they coalesce behind?
From Page 197:96583UP wrote:Bernie is not going to get the nom
this is the election where it becomes very clear the DNC is full if shit
the superdelegates shouldnt exist
instead the feudal lords will select their king
96583UP wrote:everyone wants to criticize the electoral college
meanwhile, peel back the Democratic Party nomination process and you won’t have to go far to find out it is fundamentally undemocratic in cases where a candidate receives less than 50%
the superdelegates get to decide. and the superdelegates are bound to nothing. they can have conflicts of interest. candidates can donate to superdelegates’ wives’ charities. candidates can promise them jobs. quid pro quo. nothing having to do with the will of the people.
these state primaries are near meaningless
if the progs want to use their twitter shaming powers for good then they should get out in front of this
express a preference that superdelegates vote proportionally in line with the delegate vote count
and refuse quid pro quos
All posts by this account, even those referencing real things, are entirely fictional and are for entertainment purposes only; i.e. very low-quality entertainment. These may contain coarse language and due to their content should not be viewed by anyone
- 96583UP
- The Master
- Posts: 29891
- Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Re: Election 2020
but pay-to-play for the DNC nom aside,96583UP wrote:Agree. The real story here should already be how ridiculous the DNC process is. This is why Bloomy seems relatively unfazed following last night’s beatdown. And he already is running damage control on The View (which is now a more civilized venue for discussion than the DNC debates hilariously)Rob wrote:That last question of the debate is bugging me. Why have we listened to democrats say for 3 years that the person with the most votes should win, but when it comes to their own nomination process, that shouldn’t apply? I mean, if one person had 30% and another 28%, ok, that’s close and maybe there should be a process. But it sounded to me like they just flat out rejected the idea that the winner is the one with the most votes.
From Page 196:
McParadigm wrote:What do we think the odds are, if Bernie gets the nom, that centrists of both parties work together to run a third candidate? Who would they coalesce behind?From Page 197:96583UP wrote:Bernie is not going to get the nom
this is the election where it becomes very clear the DNC is full if shit
the superdelegates shouldnt exist
instead the feudal lords will select their king
96583UP wrote:everyone wants to criticize the electoral college
meanwhile, peel back the Democratic Party nomination process and you won’t have to go far to find out it is fundamentally undemocratic in cases where a candidate receives less than 50%
the superdelegates get to decide. and the superdelegates are bound to nothing. they can have conflicts of interest. candidates can donate to superdelegates’ wives’ charities. candidates can promise them jobs. quid pro quo. nothing having to do with the will of the people.
these state primaries are near meaningless
if the progs want to use their twitter shaming powers for good then they should get out in front of this
express a preference that superdelegates vote proportionally in line with the delegate vote count
and refuse quid pro quos
I will say Bernie looks way better equipped to take on Trump in the debates.
Bloomy way too passive and Trump would look to do the same thing Warren did to him last night.
Bernie is the best fighter to punch-out Trump right now
All posts by this account, even those referencing real things, are entirely fictional and are for entertainment purposes only; i.e. very low-quality entertainment. These may contain coarse language and due to their content should not be viewed by anyone