Red Mosquito

dimejinky99 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:How to lose an election in a matter of minutes:

O'Rourke says he and his wife are descended from slave owners

I wondered about this. Is he trying to cost up to some of trumps base?

He's virtual signalling to try and revive a dead campaign.

Bi_3 wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

tragabigzanda wrote:How to lose an election in a matter of minutes:

O'Rourke says he and his wife are descended from slave owners

I wondered about this. Is he trying to cost up to some of trumps base?

He's virtual signalling to try and revive a dead campaign.

We have a winner.

Bi_3 wrote:Yup.

https://www.axios.com/alexandria-ocasio ... dfdf9.html

The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.

The group that took the poll shared the results with Axios on the condition that it not be named, because the group has to work with all parts of the party.

I'm sure the numbers are right, but it doesn't seem clear if those 1,003 people are the only ones represented in that survey. If so, it seems weird to me to suggest that these particular voters (this particular group) prefer a moderate Dem to an AOC type of candidate. That a young Puerto Rican lady & socialism are unpopular with them does not seem like news, especially the type that needs to be leaked under the radar. This is just politics.

These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts.

AKA the Obama/Trump voter - the voters who don't like the establishment and picked the change candidate the last two times. And since 434 of 435 districts won't have AOC on the ballot, it's hard to believe people obsess over her so much. Almost every poll so far shows that both Biden & Sanders - the two extremes - have decent leads over Trump, while we still know it's early and Trump has at least a 50/50 chance. People were wrong about Obama & Trump at this stage in their respective campaigns, plain and simple. Nothing coming out today is gospel.

Asked why his public option plan is better than Medicare for All, Biden says: "If you like your employer-based plan, you can keep it. If you have private insurance, you can keep it."

It’s like he’s cutting footage for GOP election ads.

I wish Beto hadn't run. I think we all do. Should have taken another stab at a senate seat.

He just needs his trusty skateboard and guitar to be cool again.

You literally named yourself after Burt Reynolds. And then literally picked an avatar of Norm MacDonald in a sombrero.

durdencommatyler wrote:You literally named yourself after Burt Reynolds. And then literally picked an avatar of Norm MacDonald in a sombrero.

Do you think that makes me cool?

BurtReynolds wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:You literally named yourself after Burt Reynolds. And then literally picked an avatar of Norm MacDonald in a sombrero.

Do you think that makes me cool?

What do you think?

In 1978 maybe?

ohthankgod

maybe delete some posts then

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

Rob wrote: AKA the Obama/Trump voter - the voters who don't like the establishment and picked the change candidate the last two times. And since 434 of 435 districts won't have AOC on the ballot, it's hard to believe people obsess over her so much. Almost every poll so far shows that both Biden & Sanders - the two extremes - have decent leads over Trump, while we still know it's early and Trump has at least a 50/50 chance. People were wrong about Obama & Trump at this stage in their respective campaigns, plain and simple. Nothing coming out today is gospel.

Regardless of the problems with that poll (and there are obvious problems), expecting that AOC is going to "define" the 2020 election is conservative wish fulfillment (or at least what conservatives believe they would like to run against). She clearly has a pedestal that others don't have, but she's not going to define the 2020 election. The two people that are going to define the election are whoever the Democrats pick and Trump.

Are the Democrats more susceptible to division than the Republicans? Maybe, but I'm leaning towards 'no'. Attempts by Republicans to create division will fall on deaf ears I think. Trump will always unify them.

The Republicans were massively divided in the primaries, but outside of a tiny handful of nevertrumper media types, they all rallied around the flag anyway. I don't know why the Democrats would be any different this time.

It seems that democrats are a lot more worried about division than I am. It's gonna get a whole lot uglier than this before the nomination is clinched, but I wouldn't worry about it for the general election. I doubt the eventual nominee will be too damaged. Voters have short memories. Let them sling mud at each other.

Yeah the Democrats really need to make sure they don't fuck up and win by 3 million votes again.