And They're Off! The Democratic Candidates for 2020

[71 dB]

Yes,  Trump will beat him soundly because he's so obviously far to the Left that every Republican will feel motivated to vote for Trump.  Same for Warren and every candidate whose policies you like.

That's a simple truth about American politics.   The better you like a candidate's policies, the less chance that candidate has of beating Trump.

Politics is multidimensional. You can be on the left socially or/and economically. Americans are largely on the left on economic issues. Half of American are struggling in the richest country in the world. No wonder lefty ideas are popular. If lefty ideas were not popular Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren wouldn't be high in the poll, now would they? Kamala Harris started dropping when she moved on the right. The only corporates doing well are Biden (because of huge name recognition and "default" support from ignorant people) and Buttigieg who is a conman. Trump won because he campaigned more lefty than Hillary. Sorry, the evidence is on my side.

[71 dB]

There's nothing wrong with believing in Bernie; there's s lot to like about him.  We've tried to explain to you why your sources of information and opinion-reinforcement are not the pure well-water you imagine them to be. And why, even if Bernie should become the nominee (which I personally doubt, though of course there remains the possibility) he will lose to Trump, in a huuuuge landslide.

What are the reliable source telling you Trump would win Bernie in a landslide? Corporate media hates Bernie, because he is bad news for the establishment (and wonderful news for regular people). Of course they create narrative were Bernie is a loser. Think man, think!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-6250.html

[SimonNZ]

^Do keep in mind how reliable the polling turned out to be in 2016

[Florestan]

What are the reliable source telling you Trump would win Bernie in a landslide?

Let's make a bet. If Bernie will be the next POTUS, I'll never ever post here on GMG. If Bernie will not be the next POTUS, you'll never ever post here on GMG.

Deal?

[SimonNZ]

What is the logic in that?

How about: if it goes against our expectations we have to admit our worldview is imperfect?

[Florestan]

How about: if it goes against our expectations we have to admit our worldview is imperfect?

My worldview is imperfect. Still, let's make a bet,

Deal?

[SimonNZ]

My worldview is also imperfect.

(Hardly seems worth having the election now)

Or did you mean a deal where I have to leave?

[Florestan]

My worldview is also imperfect.

Good then.

[71 dB]

^Do keep in mind how reliable the polling turned out to be in 2016

Polling in 2016 was actually quite accurate. Hillary got 3 million more votes pretty much as predicted The problems was people weren't savvy enough to interpret the polls corretly. You need to get your votes in correct places. Hillary didn't. Trump did.

[SimonNZ]

I dunno...what it seemed like to me was saying if there's two bullets in a revolver meaning a 2 in 6 chance of shooting yourself in Russian roulette then it's safe to go ahead and pull the trigger.

I know it's a bad analogy but a lot of people at the time seemed to interpret a 40 percent chance as being no chance.

[JBS]

What are the reliable source telling you Trump would win Bernie in a landslide? Corporate media hates Bernie, because he is bad news for the establishment (and wonderful news for regular people). Of course they create narrative were Bernie is a loser. Think man, think!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-6250.html

What you do not understand is that the key to the election is not the people who will vote for a candidate, but the people who will vote against a candidate.

Trump won because enough people voted against Hillary to give him victory.

The more progressive the candidate, the more people will be motivated to vote against him. What you want is a candidate who voters that lean right, don't particularly like Trump, and don't particularly like the Democratic Party,will feel comfortable enough with that they won't be motivated to vote against him, but instead stay home. Only the candidates you sneer at as corporate cronies will do that.

That's why it's safe to say that Bernie will lose.

[dissily Mordentroge]

My problem is my low self-esteem which makes me see other people, especially those who speak with a confident voice, knowledgeable. When these people disagree with me (as happens quite often) I get angry because my low self-esteem doesn't protect me from "being attacked". When it comes to talking about classical music, people on this forum seem to know A LOT, but the last three years have demonstrated me only maybe 20 % of members here understand well things like politics and society. Some members here struggle a lot with the concept of humanism It took me a few years to realize this (as an Asperger I am a slow learner), but the last few months have made this really clear to me.

Now that I have understood (accepted really) all of this, I am more relaxed and I don't get so angry. Posts of some members here make me annoyed and sad. It's sad to see some people with intellectual interest to explore classical music are not intellectuals on other issues such as politics, society and humanism. Not even on economics! It's amazing how people so easily believe in right-wing propaganda on economic issues such as trickle-down economics (which has never been proven to actually work) while laughing at left-wing ideas such as trickle-up economics which has plenty of success in Nordic countries for example.

One needs to balance the self-confidence to the level that is justified and that's the hard part. I have compensated my lack of self-esteem with overtly arrogant style of posting. I have to assume this applies to other members too. Maybe their arrogance is not to point out my ignorance but to hide their own insecurity? When I trust myself I can post better more politely, just explaining patiently what I know and understand without calling others morons, ignoramuses or idiots. I don't know everything and I have more to learn, but that doesn't mean I don't already understand and know a lot.

I have all the reason to feel good about believing in Bernie Sanders. He is doing fine! He has been surging and taking the lead position in many places. He has a steady cash flow of tons of individual donors who won't max out donating him $20 monthly. He has the movement, Bernie signs wall to wall. The corporate media tries to hide these facts but they can't. At this point it takes a lot to stop Bernie Sanders becoming the next president. I can see this. Can you?

This is the first post I recall in a long time giving an in depth, honest and self aware analysis or forum behaviour. Very refreshing. There are many peculiar motives for posting on forums, some of them downright psychotic, some self congratulatory arrogance, some the deluded elitism of an esoteric mutual admiration society (the Mensa of the web?). My excuse is living  a long way from anything like civil society thus having very few like minded souls to converse with until I drive into the nearest civilised outpost. That and attaining useful information of the kind I run across here frequently, mostly about composers I've never heard of or recordings I'd no idea existed. Plus all this blathering keeps my touch typing skills from totally falling apart.

I can't share you support of Bernie Sanders. As a geriatric gay hippie I hope to live long enough to see a fairy in the Whitehouse so if I was able to vote in the US elections Pete Buttigieg would be top of my list. I even have a 20PETE20 T-shirt. That I've lived long enough to see gay marriage legal in my country is in itself something I'd never have believed possible only a few decades ago. The mere idea of a queer (sorry, I'm but I'm proud of that term) president would also have struck me as insane not so long ago. So would the idea of having a juvenile, retarded real estate/hotelier thug willing to kiss Putin's arse as president.

[71 dB]

What you do not understand is that the key to the election is not the people who will vote for a candidate, but the people who will vote against a candidate.

Trump won because enough people voted against Hillary to give him victory.

The more progressive the candidate, the more people will be motivated to vote against him. What you want is a candidate who voters that lean right, don't particularly like Trump, and don't particularly like the Democratic Party,will feel comfortable enough with that they won't be motivated to vote against him, but instead stay home. Only the candidates you sneer at as corporate cronies will do that.

That's why it's safe to say that Bernie will lose.

How do you explain progressive ideas polling well? Look outside your corporate bubble. People struggle and want progressive change that helps THEM after 4 decades of oligarchy. Hillary wasn't progressive at all. People in the rust belt saw Trump more progressive or at least a chance for being progressive because Trump lied about bringing the jobs back and not forgetting regular people etc. Many of those people would have voted for Bernie in 2016 and analyse suggest Bernie would have won.

The idea that Bernie is not electable is a corporate lie without any evidence. The establishment wants a narrative were people believe what you believe and go behind a corporate candidate. The US needs change badly after decades of brutal oligarchy that has decimated half of the population into auterity that is crazy in the richest country in the world. Bernie is the man to bring that change.

I linked to the polls of Trump vs Bernie scenario and in those Bernies beats Trump easily. Facts are facts.

[SimonNZ]

Warren says all-women Democratic presidential ticket can beat Trump
Candidate says she'd consider Kamala Harris as running mate

[Karl Henning]

What are the reliable source telling you Trump would win Bernie in a landslide? Corporate media hates Bernie, because he is bad news for the establishment (and wonderful news for regular people). Of course they create narrative were Bernie is a loser. Think man, think!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-6250.html

Fear not, I do think.

[Karl Henning]

Warren says all-women Democratic presidential ticket can beat Trump
Candidate says she'd consider Kamala Harris as running mate

While Harris is possibly safe enough as a veep choice (It isn't as if the Trumpkins voted for Pence qua Pence) I doubt very much that Warren can woo the center.

[71 dB]

While Harris is possibly safe enough as a veep choice (It isn't as if the Trumpkins voted for Pence qua Pence) I doubt very much that Warren can woo the center.

How large is the center? If you are on center you are for status quo which means you are doing fine, but you are not into Republican madness. That's not much. Corporate media keeps up this myth of centrism. Those inside the Washington elite club have gold plan healthcare and they CAN afford it. They are completely clueless of why regular people want medicare for all.

[Karl Henning]

How large is the center? If you are on center you are for status quo which means you are doing fine, but you are not into Republican madness. That's not much. Corporate media keeps up this myth of centrism. Those inside the Washington elite club have gold plan healthcare and they CAN afford it. They are completely clueless of why regular people want medicare for all.

You've gone off on your riff, rather than paying attention to what JBS & yr svt have been saying.  The Democratic nominee needs to peel away Trump voters who found Hillary distasteful. Nominating a candidate who veers left enough for you to find appealing, will simply create a different element of repulsion.


This has nothing to do with your anti-"corporate media" boilerplate, and everything to do with actual voters.

[71 dB]

You've gone off on your riff, rather than paying attention to what JBS & yr svt have been saying.  The Democratic nominee needs to peel away Trump voters who found Hillary distasteful. Nominating a candidate who veers left enough for you to find appealing, will simply create a different element of repulsion.


This has nothing to do with your anti-"corporate media" boilerplate, and everything to do with actual voters.

It's true of course that a lefty candidate will lose centrist voters, but also gain lefty voters (increase turnout among them because there is a reason to vote). My lefty sources claim more lefty voters are gained than centrist lost so that's why lefty candidates have a better change against Trump. Rich Democratic voters are a minority. Poor Democratic (and Republican) voters are majority and those people are inspired by progressive candidates.

[SimonNZ]

Your sources aren't sources. They're just the modern version of talk radio.