2020 US Election (Part Two)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do think Biden can win, even with Kamala as VP. I just don't expect she will make the win easier.
Anyway, no use trying to guess - the elections are still a few months away.
 
I do think Biden can win, even with Kamala as VP. I just don't expect she will make the win easier.
Anyway, no use trying to guess - the elections are still a few months away.

If any candidate picked a hard left candidate as approved by this sub they would likely bleed votes where they need to win.
 
If any candidate picked a hard left candidate as approved by this sub they would likely bleed votes where they need to win.

I don't think any hard left person was even an option. Afaik the other likely option was a member of the Obama administration, which possibly would have been the better choice.
Like I said, though, no use trying to estimate how this will play, we are still a couple of months away from the election...
 
538's forecast is out. It starts off at Biden 71% and Trump 29%, which is the same as what their forecast said on election day in 2016. But if they tell their forecast the election is held tomorrow (leaving no time for a Trump recovery) it's 93% Biden, which sounds reasonable given how the polls are looking.
 
avoid using Kamil . One of my spare accounts or email adresses it has kinda become meaning dumb . FBl is reading this and depending on what will happen , they might come after you people for insulting Vice President .
( male name in this parts , meaning perfect or whatever)
 
I don't think any hard left person was even an option. Afaik the other likely option was a member of the Obama administration, which possibly would have been the better choice.
Like I said, though, no use trying to estimate how this will play, we are still a couple of months away from the election...

Well when you go around throwing tantrums, insulting people etc what do you expect?

Not you personally but why would you want someone like that in your administration?
 
Would sort of make sense to unite the dem party. Taking the left vote for granted hasn't been a good strategy.

The left needs to win more. Bernie got smoked fairly and they underperformed in 2018 mid terms.

The more centrist ones were the ones who won more seats off the GoP.

More votes in California and New York don't help.

American electorate as a whole isn't progressive.
 
The left needs to win more. Bernie got smoked fairly and they underperformed in 2018 mid terms.

The more centrist ones were the ones who won more seats off the GoP.

More votes in California and New York don't help.

American electorate as a whole isn't progressive.

Gop doesn't need the Bernie votes. Biden does.
Still, let's see what happens - no use estimating already.
 
Gop doesn't need the Bernie votes. Biden does.
Still, let's see what happens - no use estimating already.

If he panders to the Bernie voters he gets wrecked in the Mud West.

Well potentially. Trump's so bad I suspect almost any Democrat could beat him.

But if you want lasting change yeah the progressive wing has to perform better.

If they had proportional voting in the US I doubt they would get 15% with a potential low of 5%.
 
If any candidate picked a hard left candidate as approved by this sub they would likely bleed votes where they need to win.
What "hard left" candidate? Bernie isn't "hard left". Warren isn't "hard left".

A better question to ask would be: why are mainstream / safe / "acceptable" Democratic candidates shifting more and more towards the right. Republicans are happily dragging the Overton window into the sunset with the Democrats cautiously following under the notion of "bipartisanship" (and not the reality that is most high-ranking Democrats, and their donor base, are perfectly happy being just as bad as the Republicans if they think they can get away with it).

There are a lot of valid questions that could be asked of the DNC, but no, instead we get these silly generalisations about what this subforum would "approve" of. A generalisation, heh. Ironic that. Always weird how they seem to be okay when targeting anyone left-of-centre :)
 
What "hard left" candidate? Bernie isn't "hard left". Warren isn't "hard left".

A better question to ask would be: why are mainstream / safe / "acceptable" Democratic candidates shifting more and more towards the right. Republicans are happily dragging the Overton window into the sunset with the Democrats cautiously following under the notion of "bipartisanship" (and not the reality that is most high-ranking Democrats, and their donor base, are perfectly happy being just as bad as the Republicans if they think they can get away with it).

There are a lot of valid questions that could be asked of the DNC, but no, instead we get these silly generalisations about what this subforum would "approve" of. A generalisation, heh. Ironic that. Always weird how they seem to be okay when targeting anyone left-of-centre :)

I like Bernie but he's electorate poison where it matters in the USA. Him and the squad plus supporters.

They probably went more right after the 2918 midterms. The progressive left didn't perform that well.

They all hate Trump though.

Those 3 mud western states, Florida, Texas could flip. Wouldn't put money on Texas yet.
 
I like Bernie but he's electorate poison where it matters in the USA. Him and the squad plus supporters.

They probably went more right after the 2918 midterms. The progressive left didn't perform that well.

They all hate Trump though.
I'm trying to understand why you're talking about the "hard left", though. Especially as you're from NZ, right? NZ electoral politics are far less polarised than the States.

It's not about "what this sub approves of", it's people expressing dissatisfaction that this is where US politics is. People are going to be frustrated that this is arguably the "best" that can be hoped for. There's nothing wrong with that frustration.
 
I don't think the dems need Fluorida.

More the merrier. To fix America is gonna take decades and a Trump rout sends a message.

Think a generation assuming you can win more often than not and the GoP us sidelined and/or forced to moderate.
 
I'm trying to understand why you're talking about the "hard left", though. Especially as you're from NZ, right? NZ electoral politics are far less polarised than the States.

It's not about "what this sub approves of", it's people expressing dissatisfaction that this is where US politics is. People are going to be frustrated that this is arguably the "best" that can be hoped for. There's nothing wrong with that frustration.

No there's not. USA you can still change the system it's hard. It's not Belarus;).

Even in NZ the progressive wing of the Dems would be out of luck. Greens get around 5% here and they're the progressives.

Proportional Voting cuts the nutters out. Go to far left or right you get binned out. I suspect USA is the same, GoP will probably get that lesson in November.
 
Non-elected by the people, automatic replacements who become potus are certainly terrible.

I dunno, Ford got a carrier named after him.
 
Ha, I called it (not in here, but elsewhere).
Well I called it here, so there:p
I think he is announcing this week or next week. My money is on Kamala Harris. She just goes along so well with Biden's brand. The last thing he wants is to alienate moderates, as that would go against his entire strategy. The fact that he's essentially boxed in to picking a black woman is probably as far as he is willing to go. He's going to try to go for minimum controversy and maximum name recognition. The former disqualifies Lance-Bottoms and Abrams and the latter disqualifies Rice. I could also see him putting Rice in the Sec of State role.
Sweet, sweet, delicious being right... so bright, so beautiful... my precious.... :smug:
 
I dunno, Ford got a carrier named after him.
Truman was a'ight, iirc, and Johnson got some good stuff done - the Civil Rights Act, Medicare - but of course the Vietnam War weighs down any overall judgments of his presidency.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom