Jump to content
IGNORED

2020 Presidential Election 3: We're Down To Old White Men...And Fucking Kanye.


GreyhoundFan

Recommended Posts

"Sanders acknowledges ‘narrow path’ but says he could still be Democratic nominee"

Spoiler

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) acknowledged Monday night that he has an “admittedly narrow path” to overtake Joe Biden in the Democratic presidential race, but he insisted he could still become the party’s nominee.

Sanders, who appeared on the “Late Night with Seth Meyers” show via Skype, has fallen behind Biden by more than 300 delegates in the suspended Democratic contest and would need to win more than 60 percent of those still up for grabs to catch the former vice president.

“It is admittedly a narrow path, but I would tell you, Seth, that there are a lot of people who are supporting me,” Sanders said. “We have a strong grass-roots movement who believe that we have got to stay in, in order to continue the fight to make the world know that we need Medicare-for-all, that we need to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, that we need paid family and medical leave.”

With both Biden and Sanders largely sidelined by the coronavirus outbreak, Sanders said it is “a very, very strange time for me.”

“The campaign has been radically changed,” he said. “We can’t do rallies. We can’t get out and do door-to-door stuff, which is what we like to do.”

Sanders has faced calls from some party leaders to end his campaign and help the Democratic Party position itself for the November general election. But he has given no indication that he is preparing to do that.

He recently said he wants to debate Biden in April. His team announced it is expanding digital organizing efforts ahead of the New York primary, which on Saturday was moved from April 28 to June 23. And Sanders has signaled a strong desire to use his campaign megaphone to advocate for liberal policies.

During his 2016 bid, he remained in the race well past the point where he had a realistic chance of catching Hillary Clinton, the eventual Democratic nominee, in the delegate count.

Biden currently has 1,094 delegates to the Democratic National Convention, while Sanders has 817, according the The Washington Post’s latest tally.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Jennifer Rubin: "The benefit of the Democrats denouncing Sanders’s selfishness"

Spoiler

If you are in the search for silver linings, one benefit of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) pointlessly continuing his losing campaign is the freedom for Democrats to denounce him and his anti-party escapades. After years of humoring him, the vast majority of Democrats, from super-progressives to moderates, can now say out loud what they’ve said quietly: It has always been about Bernie. It’s not a movement, but rather a vanity project.

The Post reports, “Four years [after Hillary Clinton’s race], with the senator from Vermont still running against former vice president Joe Biden despite almost impossible odds of victory, some party leaders are increasingly worried about a reprise of the bitter divisions that many Democrats blame for Hillary Clinton’s loss.” However, the chorus of denunciations is in a way reassuring that the overwhelming majority of the party is unified behind a center-left nominee:

“I just think it’s a terrible decision for him to make because he looks very selfish,” said former Democratic senator Barbara Boxer of California, who backs Biden. If Sanders is genuine about going all in to defeat Trump, “then get out,” she said. . . .

Scott Brennan, a Democratic National Committee member from Iowa, expressed hope that the party’s divisions will not repeat because Biden “doesn’t generate the same sort of fevered hatred” from Sanders allies that Clinton did.

The problem, according to many Democrats, remains that 15 percent of Sanders supporters say in polling that they would vote for President Trump over Biden. This nugget actually makes the opposite argument: There is nothing that would satisfy some faction of the Sanders coalition that would rather blow up our democracy and reelect Trump. With people so irrational, the best response is to ignore them. They, like the MAGA-hat crowd, are unreachable and cannot be bargained with (e.g., more New Green Deal talk!). So do not try. No more outreach to Sanders, no more promised policy modifications, no more speaking slot at the convention. Enough.

This would have some salutary effects.

First, it would make perfectly clear that Biden is not Sanders and not a crazy left-winger, as Trump would like to paint him in the campaign. Biden makes a sharp distinction between the “democratic socialist” crowd and his own brand of center-left politics. Since he cannot get the 15 percent of “Bernie or Bust” Democrats (or independents), he might as well make a strong play for moderate independents and disaffected Republicans. Cutting Sanders off effectively allows Biden to pitch to gettable swing voters, not waste time on unattainable Bernie Bros.

Second, freezing out Sanders will make governance in a Biden administration much easier and more cohesive. There will be no debt to be paid to Sanders, no advisers taken on to satisfy Sanders, and no weird and distracting policy initiatives to lead the new administration astray. This would be a center-left administration confident of its own governing agenda — and personally cohesive.

Third, it would free up constructive, smart progressive leaders such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to lead that wing of the party. She has already begun that process, contributing bankruptcy and student loan forgiveness plans to the Biden campaign. With a practical, crafty progressive in the Senate (hopefully in the majority and able to lead on legislation), Biden would be able to broaden his appeal and cultivate allies in the Warren wing of the party.

In other words, shoving Sanders offstage opens up room for party builders and party reformers, putting aside unattainable proposals (e.g., Medicare-for-all) in favor of a smarter, more broadly acceptable agenda. (Biden would not need to fend off a Warren primary challenge, as Barack Obama did with Sanders in 2012.)

In sum, it is not worthwhile to court Sanders or his rabid allies. Indeed, it is far better to ignore them, clearly position Biden in the center-left, be free to construct a sensible and cohesive administration, and help clear the decks for a new group of responsible progressives.

 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an interesting analysis of several possibilities this year: "Answering an unwelcome question about a pandemic-year presidential contest: What if?"

Spoiler

The emergence of the coronavirus pandemic in the middle (or, depending on how you look at it, during the tail end) of presidential primary season set off a scramble of concern about how to conduct an election in which people were asked not to leave their homes. States that were on the brink of voting as stay-at-home orders were rolled out pushed back their contests until the immediate threat had (hopefully) passed. Others decided to press forward, outcome uncertain. Legislation aimed at addressing the pandemic included, if only briefly, consideration of how the November voting might take place.

These are important considerations and ones that had obvious urgency last month. But they are not the only considerations. There are those conventions, still ostensibly moving forward in the summer, large gatherings of lots of people in big rooms — the sort of thing that these days seems like a bizarre habit from a prior era. But, more important, there are questions about the potential human toll that the virus will exact.

After all, estimates presented by the White House on Tuesday indicate that as many as 240,000 Americans may be killed by the disease the coronavirus causes, covid-19. If the mortality rate is 1 percent, that suggests 24 million infections, one-fifth of which will require potential hospitalization. The effects of the disease hit harder among three groups of people: those who are older, those with preexisting conditions and men.

The major-party presidential candidates this year fall into two of those groups.

It’s worth asking the uncomfortable question that this raises: What if one of the candidates becomes incapacitated and can’t run? The answer is that it depends on when that might happen. But before we get to that, let’s answer another, less grim question.

Will there be conventions?

The Democratic National Convention is scheduled to be held in Milwaukee in mid-July. A new poll from Marquette University indicates that most Wisconsinites think the convention should not be held in person, given the current circumstances. Former vice president Joe Biden, the Democrat most likely to be nominated at that convention, seems to agree, saying in an interview Tuesday night that it was “hard to envision” the convention moving forward.

As recently as a week ago, the Democratic National Committee was insisting that everything was on track for the convention. It has good reason to do so, as Politico’s David Siders and Alex Thompson report: The party uses the convention to fundraise, and any indication that advertisers might not get their ads seen or that donors won’t get the desired face time hurts that effort.

Speaking to the New York Times this week, a staffer for the Republican National Committee said that its convention in late August would move forward in Charlotte as planned. That’s been driven by President Trump’s desire that the convention be held.

“Somebody was asking today, will you cancel the convention. I said, no way I’m going to cancel the convention,” Trump said in an interview on Fox News last week. “We’re not going to cancel it. It’s going to be incredible.”

We’ll see. While the Democratic rules stipulate that votes can’t be cast by proxy (probably meaning a required change to the rules should the convention not happen), the Republican rules indicate that, if the convention can’t be held, “the roll call for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall be allowed to be conducted according to procedures authorized by the Republican National Committee.”

Which brings us to the grimmer question.

What if the presumptive nominee is incapacitated?

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that the nominees for each party are Messrs. Davis, the Democrat, and Robinson, the Republican. Each, lamentably, contracts the coronavirus and is unable to accept his party’s nomination at the convention or teleconvention or whatever ends up happening.

For Davis, the Democrat, things are pretty straightforward. As when a candidate drops out, the delegates Davis had earned would largely be reallocated to other candidates.

For Robinson, the rules binding delegates are a bit more strict. (But, again, that this is happening before the convention means that the party has some leeway. Party rules aren’t necessarily made to be broken, but it’s clearly the case that they are written to be revised and amended.)

If Robinson’s situation mirrored the party’s current position — an incumbent who faced little real opposition — the real scramble would be somewhat different. In a contest with several candidates faring well, there’s a natural candidate-in-waiting. In a nominating process that’s largely been a layup, the real question is, who would be able to cobble together the support to be anointed as the replacement.

But that question overlaps with our next one.

What if the nominee is incapacitated?

So let’s say we’ve gone through the convention, whatever it looks like, and Davis and Robinson have started bashing each other day after day as the main candidates for the presidency. But then, unexpectedly, one or both contracts the virus and is out of commission. What then?

Here, things are refreshingly straightforward.

“The Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States, as nominated by the national convention,” the GOP rules state, “or the Republican National Committee may reconvene the national convention for the purpose of filling any such vacancies.”

In other words, if Robinson can’t serve as the party’s candidate, the party itself can either whip up another convention or simply fill the vacancy. Would this be a remarkable thing to do, leading to massive amounts of tension and infighting? Sure. But it’s what the rules state.

The Democrats have actually been through this recently, at least in theory. When Hillary Clinton fell ill late in the 2016 cycle, acting DNC chair Donna Brazile began a process aimed at potentially replacing her on the ballot. In a book published in 2017, Brazile explained her thinking. Her picks for replacing the Democratic ticket? Biden and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).

The party’s rules again give the party itself a lot of leeway.

“In the event of death, resignation or disability of a nominee of the Party for President or Vice President after the adjournment of the National Convention,” they state, “the National Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee shall confer with the Democratic leadership of the United States Congress and the Democratic Governors Association and shall report to the Democratic National Committee, which is authorized to fill the vacancy or vacancies.”

Brazile never quite got to that point. Hopefully no one will this year, either.

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Bernie has supporters here on FJ, but I seriously hope he does end his campaign and encourage his supporters to back Biden. Biden was not my first choice, in fact he wasn't in my top five, but the Dems really need to solidify to try and beat Twitler. "Some top Sanders advisers urge him to consider withdrawing"

Spoiler

A small group of Bernie Sanders’s top aides and allies — including his campaign manager and his longtime strategist — have encouraged the independent senator from Vermont to consider withdrawing from the presidential race, according to two people with knowledge of the situation.

The group includes campaign manager Faiz Shakir and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), a top Sanders surrogate and ally, according to the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive private discussions.

Sanders himself has become more open to the prospect of dropping out, according to one of the people with knowledge of the situation and another close ally, especially if he suffers a significant defeat in Tuesday’s Wisconsin primary, which polls suggest Joe Biden will win handily.

Beyond Shakir and Jayapal, longtime strategist Jeff Weaver has privately made a case that exiting the race more quickly and on good terms with Biden would give Sanders more leverage in the long run, according to one of the people; the other said Weaver has used a light touch in presenting his case. Weaver and Jayapal did not return calls and messages seeking comment. Shakir declined to comment.

Sanders has not a made a final decision, the people said, and other close allies have privately urged him to keep running, such as national campaign co-chair Nina Turner, while Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) is also said to favor him remaining in the race. Larry Cohen, a longtime ally who chairs a nonprofit aligned with Sanders, is waging a public campaign for him to stay in until the Democratic National Convention.

The Sanders campaign declined to comment on internal deliberations.

The split in Sanders’s inner circle to some degree reflects the hybrid nature of his political identity as both a traditional politician and a movement leader. Advisers with stronger ties to the Democratic Party have been more vocal in urging him to contemplate a withdrawal, while independent activists have been pushing for Sanders to remain in the race.

Cohen, for example, is one of the latter. “Millions of people are counting on him to be on the ballot so they can vote for that alternative vision that they support,” Cohen said. “And if he was not on the ballot, they will feel abandoned.”

One of the people with knowledge of the situation said they believe Sanders has warmed to the idea of bowing out in the near future, since he has been unable to make up any ground on Biden and is bracing for another potential landslide loss in Wisconsin, a state he won four years ago. One of the people predicted that if Sanders loses Wisconsin by more than 15 points, he probably would get out of the race and get behind Biden.

Beyond Wisconsin, this person said, there are concerns among at least some in the campaign about criticism in the press of Sanders as a spoiler who’s making it harder for Democrats to defeat President Trump. They also believe it will be difficult to change the dynamic in a race that has been frozen in place by the coronavirus crisis.

Close Sanders associates have long said the senator and his wife, Jane Sanders, are the ultimate deciders, and they are expected to reach any decision jointly. Sanders believes strongly that people in his movement need to be consulted, however, according to one of the people with knowledge of the situation.

Sanders said Friday on MSNBC that he was acutely aware of his massive deficit to Biden and was taking a “hard look” at his future. Earlier in the week, he told late-night host Seth Meyers that he still had a “narrow path” to victory.

No primaries have been held since March 17, when Biden won decisively in three states and built an almost insurmountable lead in delegates. Sanders campaign officials said after the losses that the senator would assess his path forward in consultation with close allies, signaling he was in no rush to reach a decision.

Indeed, Sanders has taken his time, offering no definitive statement about his plans. A raft of states postponed their primaries because of concerns about the novel coronavirus, sparing him what many expected would have been an ongoing drumbeat of damaging defeats.

As he’s deliberated, Sanders has shifted his campaign’s focus to the coronavirus pandemic, arguing the crisis shows why his Medicare-for-all and other sweeping liberal proposals he has promoted are so desperately needed. He has held roundtable discussions broadcast online and raised money for charities battling the outbreak.

Yet the overall contours of the contest have not changed. Polls have consistently shown Biden with a commanding lead over Sanders. A survey of Wisconsin, which has opted to move forward with its primary this week, showed Sanders trailing the former vice president by 28 points.

Sanders’s failure to gain traction in Wisconsin reflects his struggle to find support even in states where he performed well four years ago. Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin with a populist pitch that resonated strongly in the upper Midwest.

Much of that energy has evaporated against Biden, who trounced Sanders last month in Michigan and beat him soundly in Illinois.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, abruptly reversed course on Friday and urged a delay in the primary, citing the risks presented by the coronavirus. He summoned the state legislature for a special session Saturday to consider a plan to cancel in-person voting, but leaders of the GOP-led legislature have signaled they are unlikely to heed Evers.

Biden has already begun mapping out his process for choosing a vice presidential running mate. He told campaign donors Friday that he has spoken to Sanders about his plans to move forward.

“He’s a friend. I don’t want him to think I’m being presumptuous, but you have to start now deciding who you’re going to have background checks done on as potential vice presidential candidates, and it takes time,” said Biden.

Asked at a virtual fundraiser the day before that whether Sanders will concede to him and rally behind his candidacy, Biden responded that their staffs had been in touch, but “whether Bernie gets out or stays in remains to be seen.” He added that the coronavirus “is making things more complicated for him and everyone else.”

Some Democrats have become more worried in recent weeks about Sanders’s continued presence in the race, fretting that it could reignite the divisions that plagued the party in the spring and summer of 2016. Back then, many Sanders supporters refused to back Clinton and made visible shows of their distaste for the party establishment.

Biden, for his part, faces animosity from many of the left-leaning activists who back Sanders. Some have said they want Sanders to stay in until the end and have indicated they are not inclined to fall in line behind Biden.

However, associates of both men said the dynamic between the two candidates and their aides is much better than it was between Clinton and Sanders, raising hopes among some in the party for greater cooperation.

Much of the party’s original timeline for finalizing its presidential ticket has been disrupted by the coronavirus. Democratic officials said this week they will delay the Democratic National Convention to allow time to recover from the pandemic. Originally scheduled for July, officials are now eyeing an Aug. 17 start.

 

  • Upvote 8
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been seeing calls for Sanders to drop out and run as a 3rd party candidate. Apparently people have forgotten 2016. And apparently they've also forgotten that Republicans are really good at coalescing around their candidate, however objectionable he may be. I would love to hold Democrats to higher standards, but apparently those aren't the times we live in.

I'm feeling pretty miffed that Biden decided to run. Who the hell decides, as they approach their 80th birthday, to run for President? After being VP for 8 years? Part of me wonders if he looked at Trump and thought there was no way he could lose to him, so he should throw his hat in the ring.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AmericanRose said:

I've been seeing calls for Sanders to drop out and run as a 3rd party candidate. Apparently people have forgotten 2016. And apparently they've also forgotten that Republicans are really good at coalescing around their candidate, however objectionable he may be. I would love to hold Democrats to higher standards, but apparently those aren't the times we live in.

I'm feeling pretty miffed that Biden decided to run. Who the hell decides, as they approach their 80th birthday, to run for President? After being VP for 8 years? Part of me wonders if he looked at Trump and thought there was no way he could lose to him, so he should throw his hat in the ring.

Did Biden run in 2016? I thought his plan after being VP was more or less retirement. I think he ran this time around because he desperately wants Trump out and knew that he had the name recognition and stability to present a challenge to him.

I do wonder what might have happened if it had been Trump v Obama, rather than Trump v Hillary. Honestly I think Trump might have won if he’d run in 2012 too. As far as I can tell, his voters came from 4 places: the dog-whistle MAGA crowd, the “there’s an R next to his name on the ballot” crowd, the disaffected anti-establishment crowd, and the “not Hillary” crowd. 3/4 of those might have shown up in an election against Obama too, and there’d have been some unacknowledged racism of people who can’t explain why but they just think he’d do a better job. The big question is who will show up in 2020. The MAGA crowd will be back, of course. Will the anti-establishment crowd have learned from 4 years under Trump that an inexperienced idiot for president didn’t shake things up the way they wanted but rather shook up the country like a soda bottle then took off the lid and spilled it everywhere? Will the “there’s the R” crowd listen to the growing number of other republicans speaking out against Trump and demand their party back? Will there be enough of a “not Biden” crowd to matter? I think regardless of the Democratic nominee, the process of RE-electing Trump will be different, hopefully much harder, than the process of electing him in 2016 was.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Smee said:

Did Biden run in 2016? I thought his plan after being VP was more or less retirement. I think he ran this time around because he desperately wants Trump out and knew that he had the name recognition and stability to present a challenge to him.

No, I'm just thinking of Jill Stein and that Libertarian fellow. I'm just not sure if name recognition and stability will be enough... of course, my theory is that Trump got voters, besides his 'lol he's talking to politicians like I would!!111 look at him tell them how it really is for the working man!!!11' but also because he promised change. Rural places, flyover states, didn't see much of that change Obama promised, so they saw Trump's bluster [how he managed to convince them he understands the working man I'll never get, but R's are very clever about tricking the very people their policies hurt the most into voting for them] and thought something like "this guy has no fear! he'll bring back manufacturing!"

I can only hope that now, 4 years into it with nothing to show - well, you don't have to buy health insurance anymore - they'll realise it was all smoke and mirrors.

Edited by AmericanRose
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, AmericanRose said:

No, I'm just thinking of Jill Stein and that Libertarian fellow.

Gary Johnson (former governor of New Mexico). Y'all hurting my libertarian heart again. 

I believe Biden said he didn't run in 2016 because his son Beau had just died and he didn't feel ready. I agree the advanced age of all the current candidates is concerning, but I don't think criticisms of Biden running at his age are fair if we don't consider that Sanders is 79 and had a myocardial infarction in the fall. 

Political forecasting is already so shaky at best, I just have no idea what will happen in a pandemic. I'm trying to find some good sources on the 1918 Presidential election, if anyone has any recommendations. Obviously Wilson won reelection, so not sure if that is the most encouraging precedent. 

Honestly, as much as I normally pride myself on understanding different viewpoints because my political beliefs don't line up with one party, I genuinely cannot fathom how anyone can support Trump at this point. So I just can't predict what his supporters would do and what their current temperature is. So far the "rally around the flag" effect that has boosted other leaders has been much lower for Trump.

I hope the lack of change in the Rust Belt moves those voters to Biden (who seems to do well with them for a Democrat), and I hope non-Trump supporters are so disgusted with him that they turn out. I really think just getting turn out up is key. But again, it's a pandemic that's likely to resurge in the fall. So who knows how people react to that voting-wise.

I just want to live in boring times again. 

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

Gary Johnson (former governor of New Mexico). Y'all hurting my libertarian heart again. 

I believe Biden said he didn't run in 2016 because his son Beau had just died and he didn't feel ready. I agree the advanced age of all the current candidates is concerning, but I don't think criticisms of Biden running at his age are fair if we don't consider that Sanders is 79 and had a myocardial infarction in the fall. 

Haha, sorry! I remember reading about Libertarians yeeeeeeeeears ago and somewhere got the idea they were pro-pot and anti-choice, and promptly wrote them off.

Oh, I'm also miffed Sanders ran again. :D It's time to retire guys, and let someone else have the spotlight. You've had a good, long run. Also, it's a really bad look for Sanders not to release his medical records. It's not fair we should be held to a higher standard, but if we're going to criticize Trump for something, we should be careful to avoid not doing it ourselves. 

I used to consider myself an Independent, and I was thrilled to have so many choices! It wasn't that long ago, either... but after the whole Trump debacle, I immediately view people who call themselves Republicans with distrust. I'm sure there must be ordinary people who don't need conspiracy theories who support him, but all I can tell you is that my mom firmly believes this plan was 30 years in the making and Trump was appointed by god to root out corruption in the government, send 'evil people' to jail, and rescue the children from sex-trafficking.

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AmericanRose said:

Haha, sorry! I remember reading about Libertarians yeeeeeeeeears ago and somewhere got the idea they were pro-pot and anti-choice, and promptly wrote them off.

They are definitely pro-pot, but the vast majority of strongly pro-choice, though there are a few anti-choicers (Austin Peterson notably being one of them).

  • Upvote 5
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

They are definitely pro-pot, but the vast majority of strongly pro-choice, though there are a few anti-choicers (Austin Peterson notably being one of them).

As someone who considered myself a Libertarian until I read too many crazy people on reddit....I'd say it's not so much pro-pot as pro- it should be legal because the government should stay out of it.

I was surprised to read here some think Libertarians are anti-choice as a rule, that's the first I've heard of that. 

  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same here, @HerNameIsBuffy! I thought they wanted government out of your business.

Of course, Republicans like to claim they want small government as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, AmericanRose said:

Of course, Republicans like to claim they want small government as well.

Libertarians at least are a little more consistent on this one. I saw a tweet from someone recently summing up her position as "I want gay polyamorous triads to be able to own guns and breed tigers."

(I almost changed it to my location on FJ, but am too attached to my current one.)

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/07/joe-biden-skeptical-sanders-supporters?   

Quote

According to campaign officials, his team has for weeks quietly engaged top progressive organizations and movement leaders representing a range of Democratic causes from climate change to racial justice. The effort, spearheaded by senior Biden advisers, includes outreach to legacy organizations such as Planned Parenthood as well as newer, youth-led groups like the Sunrise Movement.

Biden has also made overt gestures. He recently adopted a plan by his former rival, Elizabeth Warren, to overhaul the consumer bankruptcy system and embraced elements of Sanders’ tuition-free college proposal.

“Let me say, especially to the young voters who have been inspired by senator Sanders: I hear you,” Biden said after sweeping three major primary contests last month. “I know what is at stake. And I know what we have to do.”

Quote

Biden may be the eventual nominee, said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which endorsed Warren, but “tens of millions of people who supported Warren and Sanders nonetheless wanted a president who advocated for bold, progressive policy ideas.”......  

In a virtual fundraiser on Friday, Biden was optimistic that he could find common ground with the Democrats most leery of his campaign in time to bring the party together in November.

“There’s a lot of good ideas they have – I disagree with many of them,” Biden said. But he continued: “There’s lot of significant change that can take place – both structurally and practically – that can bring everybody along.”

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of wonder if perhaps everyone looked at the mess Trump is making and said "ehhh... no. Someone else can clean it up, and then we'll see."

And that's why the candidates were less than inspiring. Of course, I liked Warren, but I also wouldn't be surprised if Biden was leading because he's a familiar face, and we can rely on him to not try to destroy the country. People are tired. When Trumpers ask me what Trump has done wrong (LOLOLOLOLOL) I don't even know where to begin... there's his hypocritical golfing, his Tweets, his nepotism, and of course his blatantly corrupt behaviour... perhaps I'll just start with whatever latest thing he's done, and ask how they would have felt if Obama had done it.

Anyway! There's my not-professional take on our situation.

Also, Trump will do everything in his power to remain in office, since the alternative, as I understand it, is trial and then possibly prison. Whoever made that 'rule' that a sitting President can't be charged is a moron and should be relieved of their job - that is such an incentive for shady tactics.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AmericanRose said:

Whoever made that 'rule' that a sitting President can't be charged is a moron and should be relieved of their job - that is such an incentive for shady tactics.

There is a good reason for this rule though. It’s there to protect the presidency from endless and frivolous litigation, essentially preventing the person filling the job from ever being able to do it. Keep the man in the courts, and you don’t have a president. Think how much the Repugliklans would have loved doing that to Obama.

There are other rules to get rid of a president: impeachment and removal from office. That it failed with Trump is only because the Trumplican senators refused to do it for their own nefarious reasons despite the overwhelming evidence.

The rules aren’t the problem. It’s the people who are supposed to use them who are to blame.

The only way to fix this, is to get rid of those people who refuse to use the checks and balances in place. 

 

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

There is a good reason for this rule though. It’s there to protect the presidency from endless and frivolous litigation, essentially preventing the person filling the job from ever being able to do it. Keep the man in the courts, and you don’t have a president. Think how much the Repugliklans would have loved doing that to Obama.

I have no doubt they would have loved it! But it gives extra incentive to stay in no matter what, IMO.

Of course, this also could have been avoided if it was an actual requirement that presidential contenders release health records and taxes. Or if the electoral college was done away with and we actually had 1 person = 1 vote.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bernie is ending his campaign.

Spoiler

Sen. Bernie Sanders, the liberal insurgent who rose from relative obscurity to build a movement and become a two-time runner-up for the Democratic presidential nomination, is ending his 2020 campaign, clearing the way for former vice president Joe Biden to be the party’s choice to take on President Trump in November.

The exit by Sanders, a 78-year-old democratic socialist from Vermont, marked the apparent close of a roller-coaster primary race that started more than a year ago. What began as the most diverse presidential field in history, featuring more than two dozen candidates, is finishing with the victory of an older white man whose prospects were written off not long ago.

Sanders’s departure presents Democrats with an immediate challenge: Can the party unify as it failed to do in 2016, when a feud between supporters of Sanders and Hillary Clinton damaged its efforts to win the presidency?

Sanders’s decision closes one of the most remarkable chapters in modern political history. His advocacy for sweeping liberal ideas, such as Medicare-for-all and tuition-free public college, shifted the national debate over the role of government.

His unexpected success in the first three primary contests made him the best-performing socialist contender in U.S. history, as well the strongest Jewish presidential candidate. At 78, Sanders was also the oldest candidate to go so far in the process.

But his campaign’s failure to capture the support of a majority of Democrats, on sharp display once the field narrowed to Sanders and Biden, underlined the limits of his left-leaning politics. A loss in the Michigan primary was especially damaging, undercutting Sanders’s message that he could expand the Democratic electorate by winning industrial areas.

Sanders also was unable to win widespread support in the African American community, a fatal problem in a party where black voters play a critical role.

The backdrop against which Sanders is calling it quits amounts to one more twist in a topsy-turvy year, as the coronavirus pandemic had forced a suspension of in-person campaigning and rallies. It’s one more element of shock and uncertainty in a brief stretch of political history that has the most unorthodox presidency in memory, punctuated by an impeachment and Russian interference in U.S. elections.

Sanders vaulted onto the national scene in 2015 as a little-known candidate against Clinton, the overwhelming favorite for the Democratic presidential nod. While the senator from Vermont had spent decades in office, he had remained on the fringes of the political discourse, espousing ideas at the left end of the spectrum that often gained little traction.

But in 2016, Sanders caught a populist wave as the Democratic Party was shifting left and capitalized on Clinton’s unpopularity. He stunned many analysts by drawing huge crowds and winning 23 primaries and caucuses.

This time, many political operatives again wrote off Sanders given the Democrats’ strong field, especially after he suffered a heart attack in early October that forced him from the campaign trail for two weeks. But Sanders confounded expectations once again, recovering strongly, attracting support from influential young liberals like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and accumulating more delegates than anyone but Biden.

Sanders also left a lasting legacy in terms of the way presidential candidates raise money. Starting with his 2016 campaign, he became an online fundraising behemoth, collecting tens of millions of dollars over the past two years, mostly in small increments from his passionate army of supporters.

For Sanders, the 2020 race was a turbulent ride of highs and lows.

He signaled his candidacy with a bang, releasing a video in February 2019 that went viral and raising $6 million in his first 24 hours. That silenced critics who predicted he would struggle to generate excitement in a crowded field with a different dynamic than he faced four years ago.

Just a week later, his campaign was in upheaval as the consultants who guided his 2016 campaign abruptly parted ways with Sanders after several strategic disagreements.

That was even before the campaign’s official kickoff, which came on a chilly March day in Brooklyn, where Sanders grew up. He unveiled a platform that closely resembled his 2016 agenda, focusing on universal health care, steep tax increases on the wealthy and forgiveness of student debt.

It quickly became clear that the tension between Sanders and the mainstream wing of the party had not faded since 2016. In April, he and his campaign aides stoked a public feud with the Center for American Progress, a Democratic think tank headed by a former top aide to Clinton. Sanders accused the group of using corporate donations to mount a “consistent effort to belittle or demean” him and undercut his policy ideas.

In July, the Sanders campaign’s internal disputes exploded into public view. The Washington Post reported that unionized field staffers on the campaign were battling management for higher wages, arguing that their compensation and treatment did not meet the standards Sanders espoused in his rhetoric. The field staff demanded an annual salary that they said would be equivalent to a $15-an-hour wage, which Sanders for years had said should be the federal minimum. The two sides reached a deal a few days later.

As fall arrived, Sanders struggled to keep his momentum, falling behind as Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) ascended. The campaign screeched to a halt on Oct. 1, when Sanders was rushed to a Las Vegas hospital after suffering chest pains during a grass-roots fundraising event. Doctors later placed two stents to open a blocked artery, and it was not immediately clear whether Sanders would be able to continue his campaign.

It was not until three days after his hospitalization, and shortly after his discharge, that Sanders’s campaign acknowledged he had suffered a heart attack.

Yet somehow the heart attack paved the way for Sanders’s political rebirth, albeit a temporary one. Shortly afterward, he received blockbuster endorsements from three of the four members of the “Squad,” young congresswomen of color including Ocasio-Cortez, who joined him at a “Bernie’s back” rally in Queens that drew a crowd of more than 25,000 people.

From there, his stock was on the rise. As Warren faded amid scrutiny of her positions on health care and her past work in the private sector, Sanders consolidated support on the left.

With his trademark irascibility and consistent focus on the same core issues, Sanders maintained a steady presence in the race as other candidates went up and down. His loyal backers gave him a floor of support. But as he later found, his polarizing politics also prevented him from growing his base beyond a plurality of the party.

In early February, Sanders fought former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg to a virtual tie in the Iowa caucuses. He parlayed that success into wins in New Hampshire and Nevada, catapulting to the top of the national polls and securing his spot as the undisputed polling leader.

But instead of using his perch to strike a more inclusive tone, Sanders stoked fights with fellow Democrats, doubling down, for instance, on his praise of Fidel Castro, which offended many Florida voters.

Days before the crucial Super Tuesday contests on March 3, his fortunes turned dramatically. First, Sanders was blown out by Biden in South Carolina, the first concrete indicator that his struggles among African Americans could be fatal for his candidacy.

Then Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) dropped out of the race and endorsed Biden, the starting gun for the mainstream faction of the Democratic Party to coalesce around the former vice president almost overnight.

The result was a brutal showing for Sanders on Super Tuesday. Biden won 10 of the 14 states that held primaries, including some where he had never campaigned or advertised. From there, Sanders was never able to recover.

Had he won the nomination, Sanders would have been the oldest person ever inaugurated as president — though Biden or Trump will assume that title if either takes the oath in January.

The 2016 campaign left lasting scars on Democrats, as many of Sanders’s followers believed that party leaders had unfairly worked to ensure Clinton’s nomination. That campaign also highlighted dramatic divisions over the party’s direction that persisted into the 2020 race.

Sanders was unable to fully capitalize on those divisions as he did four years ago. In the interim, Democrats had moved in his direction on various policies, and his once-singular calls for sweeping liberal ideas like Medicare-for-all and free college were diluted by similar proposals from other candidates.

Ultimately, Democrats chose Biden’s less-aggressive positions and rhetoric, believing they presented the best chance to defeat a president they revile.

Sanders has pledged to support Biden as the nominee, but questions remain about what his loyal supporters will do and how forcefully Sanders will urge them to back the former vice president. At rallies across the country over the past year, many Sanders supporters said in interviews that they would not be inclined to vote for the Democratic nominee if it wasn’t Sanders.

Democratic leaders hope this time will be different. In 2016, few believed that Trump could win, reducing pressure on Democrats to unify. And Sanders’s decision to end his campaign contrasts with his 2016 strategy of pressing on through the Democratic convention.

Although Sanders campaigned aggressively to activate new voters — particularly young people — who had not participated in politics in the past, his efforts fell short, exit polls and turnout figures showed.

Throughout his candidacy, Sanders’s message, while remaining revolutionary in scope, also varied. One week he was underscoring his electability. The next he focused on health care. Other times, he seemed content to reopen old battles with Democrats. He would sometimes talk about his biography, only to leave it out of his speeches for weeks. His confidants said it was hard to persuade him to listen to their advice.

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Sad 1
  • Rufus Bless 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say I'm glad he dropped out before the convention. This means there won't be so much contention as there was in 2016 with many Bernie bro's opting out of voting in protest. 

Biden is now the official candidate and can completely focus on beating Trump. I don't think Trump stands much of a chance, really. There are only two things Trump can do to stay in office: 1. cheat the hell out of the elections, but much, much more than he was able to do in 2016, and 2. cancel the elections altogether -- but can he even do that legally?

 

Edited by fraurosena
  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was also going to post a link about Bernie ending his campaign. Anyway, if we really want to defeat the Manchurian Cantaloupe, Bernie supporters are going to have to now support Biden.

  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

2. cancel the elections altogether -- but can he even do that legally?

My husband keeps saying this is what Trump is going to do. That all the times he has said he needs an extra year, Trump is dead serious. The economy is one of the things Trump had going for him, but that is tanking pretty fast. Biden will be able to rip him to shreds over how he let people die in this pandemic. If Trump can cancel the election, I think he will. Especially since there is a good chance he won't be able to hold lots of big rallies to stir up supporters to go vote. 

ETA: If Trump announces the election is canceled, I strongly believe that the republicans will support it and do everything in their power to make sure his edict comes true. Mitch will make it happen if he can. 

Edited by formergothardite
  • Upvote 3
  • Sad 2
  • I Agree 4
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Sanders has officially suspended his campaign.

I've heard some rumors that Biden and Sanders actually have a pretty good working relationship, especially as compared to HRC and Sanders, and Sanders is more willing to help his campaign. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. 

Harris or Warren for VP, right?

6 hours ago, formergothardite said:

ETA: If Trump announces the election is canceled, I strongly believe that the republicans will support it and do everything in their power to make sure his edict comes true. Mitch will make it happen if he can. 

Ever since I watched Republicans flat out lie about Obama being a lame duck president and state no outgoing president has ever nominated a Supreme Court justice (some even trying to gaslight us into believing Reagan nominated Kennedy in 1987 and not 1988, despite you know...having actual newspaper articles disproving that), I don't put anything past them. 

If the past four years have been a lesson in anything for me, it's in how much some adults will bold face lie to other adults even in the face of concrete evidence disproving them. And how much other adults will go along with believing them. 

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, nausicaa said:

Harris or Warren for VP, right?

From the WaPo: "The 11 most logical picks for Joe Biden’s vice president, ranked"

Spoiler

Joe Biden is now the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, after Bernie Sanders suspended his campaign Wednesday morning.

The next big question in the race — beyond when and how Biden will be formally nominated amid a pandemic, of course — is who is going to fill out the ticket as Biden’s vice presidential running mate. The pick carries unusual importance, especially given Biden, who will turn 78 shortly after Election Day, would be the oldest president ever elected by far.

We already know one thing about that pick: It will be a woman, as Biden pledged in a recent debate.

Below is a ranking of who makes the most sense to be that running mate.

11. Susan E. Rice: This may be the most outside-the-box name on this list, but she’s got the résumé: She served on the National Security Council and in a high-ranking State Department role in the Clinton administration, and she was United Nations ambassador and national security adviser in the Obama administration. She’s also an African American woman and has recently shown an interest in elective politics, considering a run against Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) this year. The one most obvious drawback here: She was in line to possibly become President Barack Obama’s secretary of state but withdrew after the Benghazi, Libya, attack threatened to make her confirmation “lengthy, disruptive and costly,” in her words. She had come under sharp criticism for being misleading about the nature of that attack. That may not be a dealbreaker, but her public pronouncements turned her into a lightning rod, and Republicans would be happy to make Benghazi an issue again.

10. Michelle Lujan Grisham: The New Mexico governor won’t be a familiar name to many who follow national politics, nor is her state a battleground. But she’s among the relatively few Hispanic women who currently serve in high office in the United States.

9. Stacey Abrams: Abrams remains a popular pick on these kinds of lists, given she ran a strong campaign for Georgia governor in 2018. But she’s still someone who hasn’t served in any office beyond the state legislature. It also may be tempting for Biden to pick her in hopes of putting an increasingly purple state in-play — and some polls have suggested that’s not totally outside the realm of possibility — but you do wonder how much of a priority that will be, ahead of more-competitive states.

8. Tammy Duckworth: The senator from Illinois arguably checks more boxes when it comes to her profile than anyone on this list. She’s a senator and former member of the House. She’s a Purple Heart recipient who lost both of her legs in Iraq and was the first disabled women elected to Congress. She also in 2018 became the first senator to give birth while in office. And she’s got a diverse background as the daughter of a Thai mother of Chinese decent. One thing I often think about, though, is her electoral history. She was one of the most hyped Democratic House candidates in the 2006 election but lost in a good Democratic year (albeit in a tough district). She was later elected to the House in 2012 and the Senate in 2016, defeating Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.).

7. Val Demings: The only House member on this list, she got her first taste of the national spotlight when she served as one of the House impeachment managers. She’s also an African American and former police chief of a major city, Orlando. Like Duckworth in 2006, though, she was a much-hyped House candidate in the 2012 election and lost. She went on to run for mayor of Orange County, Fla., but dropped out in 2015. She has also been in federal office for just more than three years.

6. Catherine Cortez Masto: She’s the Latina politician with the best shot at being Biden’s pick. Masto was elected to the Senate in 2016 and previously served as Nevada’s attorney general for two terms. Winning Nevada shouldn’t be an issue for Democrats, as it has trended to the left in recent years. But it wouldn’t hurt to have an insurance policy.

5. Tammy Baldwin: This is the first pick on this list that comes from one of the true battleground states. Baldwin has served as a senator from Wisconsin since 2012, when she became the first openly gay person ever elected to the Senate. Two years after Trump’s narrow win in her state, she won reelection by 11 points in 2018.

4. Elizabeth Warren: When it comes to trying to unite the party after the Democratic primary, she might be the best pick. She overlaps with Sanders on many policies and could help make sure those voters don’t stay home or cross over to support Trump, as some did in 2016. At the same time, she’s also a septuagenarian who will turn 71 in June, which isn’t ideal as a backup for Biden. As a liberal senator from Massachusetts and former Harvard University professor with demonstrated struggles over her past claims to Native American heritage, it’s not difficult to see how she might be attacked.

3. Gretchen Whitmer: If Biden wants a running mate who hails from one of the three key states that Trump carried narrowly in 2016 — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — the Michigan governor makes the most sense. She’s also notably been among Trump’s most vocal critics during the coronavirus outbreak. Trump at one point even said he told Vice President Pence not to call Whitmer because of her criticism. That’s not to say she’s doing this for any reason other than she’s concerned about the federal response in her state, but this could be a key argument for the Biden campaign in the general election, and she’s been out front on it.

2. Amy Klobuchar: The senator from Minnesota did Biden a major solid by dropping out of the race ahead of Super Tuesday and helping him win that state. She also earned strong reviews for her debate performances, and she has the kind of Midwestern appeal that could help in a state such as Michigan or Wisconsin. Her electoral history is pretty sterling. One drawback, though, is that she ran as a more pragmatic candidate in the primary and wouldn’t necessarily appeal to liberals who feel strongly about issues such as Medicare-for-all. That said, her Senate record is unmistakably liberal.

1. Kamala D. Harris: There’s a reason Harris tops many of these lists: She’s perhaps the most logical choice. She’s the only black woman serving as either a governor or senator right now. Her presidential campaign flamed out after an early surge, and given her background as a prosecutor, it is easy to see playing the traditional VP role of attacking the opposition. At the same time, one person she attacked in rather personal terms during the primary was Biden, whose past position on busing she vehemently criticized, while comparing her own experience with the issue. The main criticism of her campaign was that it wasn’t really about anything, and even on busing, her position didn’t wind up being much different than what Biden’s had been. Perhaps having her own message will be less of an issue, though, when she’s running as part of a ticket.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thank You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • GreyhoundFan locked and unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.