Geoff > Status Update

Cecily wrote: "Also in a lighter mood. A flowchart of how to decide which Dem to vote for. It's not entirely complete or up to date, but it made me smile. Especially the bit about rotating PDFs"

Nifty flowchart, there! Haha, it made me smile too. Good news is, the flow chart just got a lot simpler with a few more dropouts announced.

Antonomasia: I liked Yang too. His chances were, in a quote from somewhere, "longer than a long shot" but he came further than anyone expected. With nothing to lose, he was often funny, spontaneous, genuine, likable, differentiating, without trying too hard (like *ehem* others). He had fun. Hope to see Yang again in a key DEM capacity that will that put innovation and ideas to work (except for the UBI, which won't).

Buttigieg's strength is that lots of people like him. More specifically: lots of sort of (white) people like him.

In this fractured field, most of the candidates have very specific bases - when you break down the voters by age, education, gender, professed ideological position in the party, you see candidates who are getting 70% of one part of the vote, but under 10% of another. Buttigieg isn't really popular with any of those groups, but he's also not unpopular with any of them. In Iow and New Hampshire, he was getting 20-30% across the board, which in an extremely fractured race is enough to win you states. His only big weakness so far has been with non-white voters, and the make-or-break question for him is whether he can break through that limitation on the back of his bump.

In a broader stragetic sense, Buttigieg is basically young Biden. Biden represents the majority position of the party, which is why he's so incredibly popular. But there are question marks over Biden as a candidate - his age and fitness, his ability to debate, his entanglements. So if you want someone like Biden - pragmatic, unifying, results-oriented, electable - but you don't actually want Biden, then look, here's this bright young thing. He's young, he's articulate. He's gay and cosmopolitan, but he's also a solid guy, a veteran from the midwest, so he ticks both the 'historic candidacy' and 'not out of touch' boxes.

To put it another way: Biden's a good enough candidate that he drove most of the high-profile alternative Bidens out of the race (Sherrod Brown, for instance), but he's not a good enough candidate to completely reassure his base. So Buttigieg is their alternative.

And that's also why Klobuchar did so well in New Hampshire. Biden got hit in Iowa, so some of his fans abandoned ship. The ones still backing him at that point had dismissed Buttigieg already, so Klobuchar was the natural option. Klobuchar's entire reason for being in this race has been to be the in-case-of-fire-break-glass Emergency Biden.

[The non-white problem for both Klobuchar and Buttigieg is primarily Biden's lock on the black southern vote. That'll probably see him through (I think Biden's still the favourite overall). But if it doesn't, if that vote does desert Biden en masse, then it's likely that either Buttigieg or Klobuchar will benefit (now that Booker isn't around).]

I do think it's always funny, every four years, the way the media acts around this time.

Last four years: "of course, Candidate X will struggle in Iowa and New Hampshire, but that doesn't matter, because their support in more racially mixed states is great"

Now: "Candidate X struggled in Iowa and New Hampshire! Their candidacy is basically over!!!"

Don't get me wrong, I don't know what's going to happen. On the one hand, Biden has a big base waiting for him in the south. On the other hand, historically the snowball down from New Hampshire is very hard to stop. It also depends what the other candidates do - in particular, Sanders has a very low ceiling (he's the most disliked of the candidates other than Gabbard), but so long as the field is fractured he can Trump his way through with a solid base.

But regarding Biden, Sanders and Buttigieg, the first two states went exactly as everybody should have been expecting (the one slight surpise is that Warren did so badly in New Hampshire), so nothing's really changed. But of course, every four years, after four years of the media lamenting the way the media freaks out and inadvertantly lets their hype drive the voting, the media freaks out and inadvertantly lets their hype drive the voting...

Alfred wrote: "Peter (Pete) wrote: "He is a blowed dried candidate with a sinister past"

And at 38 years old, he's barely started on his villainous career! Wait till he's 48 or 73 years with some real estate exp..."

I provided the detail to look into Mayor Pete and google still operates.

And people wonder why Mayor Pete has trouble with people of color.
https://www.theroot.com/mayor-pete-s-...

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/...

Enough delusions. It's Sanders or civil war.

I was just kidding with you, you know... When things get serious, I default to levity. No offense intended.

Anyway, I'm not for or against Buttigieg, mostly because I don't see him as a viable candidate. I do google often, and did google all the candidates. Haven't found a perfect one yet.

Abu dejjaj's candidacy is pretty rich in that many of the same people who touted Hillary as the most qualified presidential candidate in history are now claiming with a straight face that the former mayor of the fourth largest city in Indiana is qualified to be president.

David wrote: "Abu dejjaj's candidacy is pretty rich in that many of the same people who touted Hillary as the most qualified presidential candidate in history are now claiming with a straight face that the forme..."\

Things like qualifications matter little to DNC establishment what matters to them is whether the candidate supports the gravy train from big-money donors and whether the consultants on DCCC campaigns can keep the spigot open.

Peter (Pete) wrote: "David wrote: "Abu dejjaj's candidacy is pretty rich in that many of the same people who touted Hillary as the most qualified presidential candidate in history are now claiming with a straight face ..."

Yeah, this season has been interesting for exposing just how cynical and opportunistic every argument made by the establishment types really is; eg, a Palestinian woman boos Hillary Clinton and Neera Tandnen sees it as an example of white male rage.

David wrote: "I have difficulty saying what Buttigieg's appeal is supposed to be, but I think he activates a certain nostalgia among the professional managerial class hoping that we can return to pre-2016 by simply finding Obama 2.0. Someone simultaneously cool and dorky, an insider who can also claim a minority identity."

Yes, absolutely. That was evident in the positive pieces over the summer and BTL comments or blogs I've seen since.

It was more like, where has, since around Oct/Nov, been praising him like those early articles did? (I'd seen more about Warren and Biden in the months and weeks leading up to primaries, now it is lukewarm positivity about Sanders.) I'd guess there is also positive coverage of PB on TV because TV would like the bland, mainstream and young (but being in the UK I don't see US TV.)

Given the huge chasm between Tump/MAGA and Dems (and many mainstream Republicans), sure, people want the "right" candidate, but I wonder how many people will now be prepared for absolutely anyone who isn't Trump.

In the past, "Never Trumper" was a term if derision, mostly by Trump, but has the time come for everyone who isn't a Trumper to be a Never Trumper, just for this election?

"Voting isn't marriage, it's public transport. You're not waiting for "the one" who's absolutely perfect: you're getting the bus, and if there isn't one to your destination, you don't not travel- you take the one going closest."

https://twitter.com/debbiebmoon/statu...

Cecily wrote: "Given the huge chasm between Tump/MAGA and Dems (and many mainstream Republicans), sure, people want the "right" candidate, but I wonder how many people will now be prepared for absolutely anyone w..."

I believe Trump's approval rating is now the highest it's been his whole presidency. The quality of the candidate actually matters an enormous amount, in my opinion.

I'm not saying the quality doesn't matter. Obviously it does. But even if your least favourite candidate is selected, would you vote for them or stay home?

I definitely wouldn’t vote for Bloomberg, and probably not Buttigieg. Probably not anyone but Sanders at this point.

Cecily wrote: "I'm not saying the quality doesn't matter. Obviously it does. But even if your least favourite candidate is selected, would you vote for them or stay home?"

Sanders yes, Warren yes.

Steyer, maybe.

Biden or Klobuchar, maybe if I get drunk first.

Pete, probably not.

Bloomberg, hard no.

Outside of Bloomberg any Dem is preferable to Trump in the general but that is a low bar to clear. If the election comes down to a contest between two Oligarchs like Trump and Bloomberg what is the point of voting.

Peter (Pete) wrote: "Outside of Bloomberg any Dem is preferable to Trump in the general but that is a low bar to clear. If the election comes down to a contest between two Oligarchs like Trump and Bloomberg what is the..."

That's a dark possibility. Bloomberg just seems more competent and systematic in his evil.

And it does look like a possibility. I'm personally happy that Pete got 2nd and Klobuchar got 3rd, though. Neither of them have a chance at the nomination unless they radically increase their numbers among non-white voters (I saw a poll that had Amy at literally 0%), so by all means I want them to stay in, and keep splitting the "moderate" vote- siphoning votes away from Bloomberg, as well.

Biden may have a chance to rebound in South Carolina, but his support completely collapsed in New Hampshire. I really don't think it makes sense to call him the front-runner at this point. All he had going for him was the notion of electability, but once you lose a couple of elections you don't seem that electable anymore. He's going to end up the Ed Muskie of 2020.

As a Sanders supporter, I think the biggest threat now is Bloomberg. He has risen to third in some national polls, and he's putting an unprecedented amount of money into his campaign. Hard to predict what the result of that will be.

I still don't see Bloomberg as a threat, despite his current ranking in the national polls. That's just the glow effect of ads blitzing. He hasn't been through the wringer of public debates and public scrutiny on live responses **, and he still needs to properly address Stop & Frisk, and defend buying his way into the campaign. Sure, he has tried to explain and apologize in various media interviews, but most people aren't following political news daily. Most people only tune in to hear candidates' views at the debates just a few days before deciding their votes at the primary.

Case in point, the Klobuchar surge in NH. Many voters liked what they heard at the NH debate and voted accordingly. I am very glad that she had her star moment of the slow and steady underdog prevailing. But as you've pointed out, she has an almost insurmountable hurdle going forward polling only at 4% nationally and 0% African-American.

The African-American vote will still stay with Biden for the most part in SC, but Steyer and Bloomberg are siphoning off some of that black vote. If Bloomberg starts to poll highly with African-Americans, it means voters have moved past Stop & Frisk. That's a poll I would watch very closely.


** Biden was the front runner for a long time until his first debate performance (and subsequent poor performances). People saw the myth cut down to size, and that he wasn't the electable front runner many people thought he was. I think the same will apply to Bloomberg. He won't win the nomination, and he said he will back whoever gets it.

-----------------------

Cecily: My vote goes to whomever gets the nomination because sitting out, or voting for a late independent entrant, means giving the election to Trump. I think rationally, we all know that but emotionally, it's understandably a much harder decision to make.

Wastrel wrote: "But regarding Biden, Sanders and Buttigieg, the first two states went exactly as everybody should have been expecting (the one slight surpise is that Warren did so badly in New Hampshire), so nothing's really changed. "

True. The devil is in the details too. There are probably some charts out there somewhere giving some clarity on the voter breakdown:

-did Sanders get new voters in NH, or did votes come from those who supported him in 2016 and again in 2020? Sanders will get a huge boost when or if Warren drops off. I think that's inevitable.

-did Kasich's moderate supporters, disgusted with Trump, switch over from GOP to DEM moderate like Klobuchar, maybe Buttigieg?

-Where did Warren's supporters go? Did they split three-ways Sanders (ideologically compatible?), Klobuchar (solidarity for another female candidate?), Buttigieg (from college-educated, white, affluent areas?)


"[The non-white problem for both Klobuchar and Buttigieg is primarily Biden's lock on the black southern vote. That'll probably see him through (I think Biden's still the favourite overall). But if it doesn't, if that vote does desert Biden en masse, then it's likely that either Buttigieg or Klobuchar will benefit (now that Booker isn't around).]"

Possibly, but doubt it. The non-white vote - at least in the early primaries in NV, SC - will go to Steyer, Bloomberg. I just don't know how Klobuchar and Buttigieg can win the non-white votes in such a short amount of time between now and next primary, if they haven't been successful in the past year.

Sanders has a lot of support from people of color I think they would go to him before Steyer and once they hear more about Bloomberg they aren't going to find him very palatable either.

Peter (Pete) wrote: "If the election comes down to a contest between two Oligarchs like Trump and Bloomberg what is the point of voting."

If this happens, I am done. And I think this would be the case for many other people as well. Certainly it would be the end of the Democratic party, and it would be the most pathetic "resistance" to Trump we could possibly muster. Four years of t-shirts and bumperstickers saying RESIST, four years of women's marches, of constant reminders everywhere to be engaged civically, and we get....Bloomberg? This would be the last, greatest betrayal of the last, meanest dream. And I will be done.

ATJG wrote: "Peter (Pete) wrote: "If the election comes down to a contest between two Oligarchs like Trump and Bloomberg what is the point of voting."

If this happens, I am done. And I think this would be the ..."

Same here.

I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for a couple months this summer to canvas for Bernie in a swing state. I sure as hell am not going to do that for anyone else.

David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for a couple months this summe..."

God bless you, David, but I am also beginning to wonder if it isn’t crazy to worry about Trump just deciding not to leave office in the event of a loss. Every day it feels like this crisis gets a little more possible.

David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for a couple months this summe..."

I'm going to try, as well, as I have all of August off- assuming it's Bernie. Not necessarily Nevada, but some swing state...

Mike wrote: "David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for a couple mon..."

How 'bout Pennsylvania!

ATJG wrote: "David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for a couple mon..."

"The bloody and chaotic world around us is the rule of law" - China Mieville

If Trump won't leave office the normal way, I think there's still a lot of work to do in terms of driving the crisis to its brink.

David wrote: "ATJG wrote: "David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for..."

Where’s Cody? I feel like he’d have something to say about this? ;)

ATJG wrote: "David wrote: "ATJG wrote: "David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or..."

Oh, I'm ready. I've started doing pull-ups and chin-ups every day in Golden Gate Park.

David wrote: "Mike wrote: "David wrote: "I think Trump will almost certainly win a second term if Bloomberg is the nominee.

If Sanders is the nominee, I think I'm going to try and move to Reno or Las Vegas for..."

Maybe so. But then I might end up in the west anyway. One way or another, I will try to make myself useful.

I think 30% of the US population won't accept the results of a Trump defeat at the polls. I don't know how that will play out but I am not ruling out anything. I wouldn't even come up with scenarios, that I regularly dwell on these days, in my wildest imagination, when I thought about what Republicans would do with the results of a say a potential Bush II defeat back in 2004.

Peter (Pete) wrote: "I think 30% of the US population won't accept the results of a Trump defeat at the polls. I don't know how that will play out but I am not ruling out anything. I wouldn't even come up scenarios I r..."

This year is going to suck. Every day will be worse than the one that came before it.

If America weren't so vast, I think we'd already be in a civil war or else we'd just have to learn to hate each other a little less.

David wrote: "we'd just have to learn to hate each other a little less."

Is such a thing even possible anymore? Social media, read news, read entertainment, is just monetized hate.

But I think you’re right. Sides have squared off, and there is no reconciliation possible.

The corporate immune system is fully mobilized against all positive projects:

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/13/805412...

ATJG wrote: "The corporate immune system is fully mobilized against all positive projects:

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/13/805412..."

T.R. wrote: ""

WOW

ATJG wrote: "T.R. wrote: ""

WOW"

It's a big club, and you ain't in it. -- George Carlin

That picture says it all.

Mike wrote: "That picture says it all."

This picture is worth a thousand turds.

ATJG wrote: "Mike wrote: "That picture says it all."

This picture is worth a thousand turds."

It's strange though, that Bernie never seems to be in these pictures of rich golf-playing perverts. Hmmm...

Post-NH Morning Consult national poll has Bernie up by 10% on Biden. Bloomberg lurking in 3rd...

https://twitter.com/jchaltiwanger/sta...

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/s... If this gets passed, hello 2nd term.

not with a democratic house thankfully

I will say if Bloomberg is the nominee. I will sit this one out or vote third party. I will vote in the general for any other Dem but an oligarch is a bridge too far.

Peter (Pete) wrote: "I will say if Bloomberg is the nominee. I will sit this one out or vote third party. I will vote in the general for any other Dem but an oligarch is a bridge too far."

To be a little Machiavellian about this, not that I'm a person with any kind of platform whatsoever, I think that everyone who feels this way should say it as vocally and as often as possible.

This is actually part of why Bloomberg would lose- because so many of us, particularly on the left, aren't going to vote for him. So I suggest we do whatever each of us can to make that known ahead of the convention. The louder that sentiment becomes, the more the DNC will hesitate to try to hand the nomination to Bloomberg- assuming, that is, that they would rather defeat Trump than defeat Bernie.

Mike wrote: "Peter (Pete) wrote: "I will say if Bloomberg is the nominee. I will sit this one out or vote third party. I will vote in the general for any other Dem but an oligarch is a bridge too far."

To be a..."

that is precisely why I stated that.

Cannot agree more! This one seems easy. Trump/Bloomberg is the same vote.

What Bloomberg is doing to American democracy right now is already a thousand times worse than anything “the Russians” are alleged to have done in 2016. Never Bloomberg, under any circumstances.