What's new
By:

2020 Presidential election

JazzyFresh said:
See I knew you call her a liar.
Click to expand...

Patricia Smith? I didn't call her a liar. I said she was not an impartial observer. My guess would be Clinton gave pretty close to the same non-committal response you posted her saying, and the Patricia Smith heard it the way you heard it. Does make her a liar, just wrong.

JazzyFresh said:
As long as you can criticize Trump though.
Click to expand...

I have occasionally praised Trump, as well.
 
Catchall said:
The states that qualify as "swing states" change from time to time, however. Last year, you could argue that the "swing states" included Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and North Carolina, as well as Ohio and Florida. Labeling a state as a "swing state" is really just a political analyst concluding that other states are very likely to vote with one party or another going into an election.
Click to expand...
I'm of the opinion that a few select States should never be the only ones whose votes matter.

IDGAF if those states change every so often.

I believe that all votes should matter the exact same amount.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
JazzyFresh said:
See I knew you call her a liar.

And lol I hardly ever mention Hillary. You guys are on your 8th impeachment on Trump and he hasn't been found guilty of a single thing. As long as you can criticize Trump though.
Click to expand...
Actually Trump has only been impeached once. I know, it seems like he should have been impeached like 8 times so I understand your confusion.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Catchall said:
I did make a serious argument to support the electoral college system. The country, as a whole, is comprised of 50 states, each of which has sovereign rights in the process of electing the President. If you remove those rights, you remove the meaning of states in the electoral process. That's apparent.

If you want to abolish the electoral system, and you regard my response to you as trivializing, then so be it. You can react however you like.
Click to expand...
Did you know that the citizens of a state could vote for a candidate and then the dude in charge of the electoral votes for that state could be like "ha ha ha, **** you guys. I'm giving the electoral votes to whoever I want"

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Zombie said:
So... Three people got more votes than two did? Imagine that lol.

FWIW:



Sanders crushes every moderate but Biden head to head.
Click to expand...


That’s not the point.

In arguably one of the most progressive states, the moderates still outperformed the progressives. I absolutely think the warning bells should be going off as swing states could potentially be far more difficult for Sanders to win. Especially once we consider the Fox News scare machine kicking into high gear. We are handing republicans the sword to kill us with.

The demographic we should be chasing is @colton. He wrote this earlier this week:

I would almost certainly vote for Biden or Klobuchar. Or Yang, even. Don't know enough about Bloomberg. Mixed feelings about Buttigieg. Probably would not vote for Warren. And would never in a million years vote for Sanders.
Click to expand...

moderates and disenchanted republicans is what fueled the 2018 midterms. We should be focusing on winning them over and isolating the Trump base.

I know I know, Fox News will always label Democrats as socialists. True. But why make it easier for them by nominating sanders? In the time it takes for him to explain the difference between socialism and democratic socialism to one person, trump will have convinced 100 that sanders is no different than Stalin.
 
The Thriller said:
n arguably one of the most progressive states, the moderates still outperformed the progressives.
Click to expand...

They didn't though, Bernie got more votes than anyone. Also voters really don't confine themselves to ideological lanes as much as you'd think. Meaning if/when any one of Biden/Buttigieg/Klobuchar drops out many of them will be switching their support to Sanders. Comparing the votes of two candidates vs three is incredibly misleading.

You are making a couple assumptions about Sanders viability in the general election that I think are a little off. First that the charge of socialism, levied by Trump and Fox News, is going to be uniquely damaging to him. I don't buy this argument. He's been around forever and faced this criticism last election cycle and his popularity is higher than ever. Second, the people who are going to take Fox News' or Trump's word on this are not going to be voting for a Dem regardless.

Anyway, all this to say ideology is much less important to the average voter than those of us who are political junkies tend to think it is. Sanders is popular, and he speaks to working class concerns better than any other candidate running. That's going to be the key to winning back some of the people who supported Trump last time imo.
 
I don't want to simply nominate the candidate that people think has the best chance to beat trump.

I want to nominate the best candidate to be president. I want the smartest, most compassionate, hardest working, best candidate possible.

Hopefully they are one in the same.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top