2020 Presidential Election Discussion

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Michael Bloomberg, Donald Trump, establishment Democrats, establishment Republicans, and the establishment media don't give a f*ck about us. They only care about retaining and expanding their own power, wealth, and influence.

Bloomberg has casually switched political affiliations from Democratic to Republican to Independent and back to Democratic in last 20 years. That doesn't really seem like the pattern of someone with firm political values and vision; that seems more like a pattern of personal convenience. He's pretty much paid to play in the next round of Democratic debates, in spite of not meeting the minimum unique donor quota, by spending hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money on campaign ads and donating $300,000 to the DNC...who suddenly and all too conveniently felt the need to change the rules in order to allow Bloomberg into the debate, when no such luxury was offered to other candidates.

Bernie or bust.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg

Can't say I disagree there.

So he is just another billionaire going to wherever the sun is shinning. Why don't Trumpers like him then?

IF Iowa is any indicator, we're getting Sanders or Buttigeig and I can see Sanders getting shafted as Buttogeig is younger, more of a party guy and more likely to play the established game, by the established rules.

But, imo. Still to early.

Originally posted by Eternal Idol
Michael Bloomberg, Donald Trump, establishment Democrats, establishment Republicans, and the establishment media don't give a f*ck about us. They only care about retaining and expanding their own power, wealth, and influence.

Bloomberg has casually switched political affiliations from Democratic to Republican to Independent and back to Democratic in last 20 years. That doesn't really seem like the pattern of someone with firm political values and vision; that seems more like a pattern of personal convenience. He's pretty much paid to play in the next round of Democratic debates, in spite of not meeting the minimum unique donor quota, by spending hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money on campaign ads and donating $300,000 to the DNC...who suddenly and all too conveniently felt the need to change the rules in order to allow Bloomberg into the debate, when no such luxury was offered to other candidates.

Bernie or bust.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg

I agree with what your saying and it's just one of the problems bernie faces plus as folks leave the race how the bleed off of voters gets split can be a potential problem if they mainline it to a "moderate" candidate instead of bernie, like adam said up above.

Originally posted by Robtard
Thread is a year old. Shows you how much can happen in just a year. eg A year ago Biden was nigh a shoe-in.

Which is especially funny now that Biden's floundered in the first caucus, if he keeps this up and doesn't get the nomination, then Trump committed his crimes regarding Ukraine for no real reason. And that my frined is an el Oh el.

Right? What was Trump thinkin' starting that investigation before Biden even announced his candidacy? It's like Trump was investigating for the wrong reasons. SMH

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Have they still not announced the winner?

What a fu#king shit-show. I hate the DNC. Fu#k this stupid app... use paper ballots.

lol, umad, bro?

This is how everyone feels.

It would just be nice to not have a corrupted democracy.

You have to also notice that not only do they not want to release the results because Bernie did so well, but also because Biden is so poorly, the 8-year VP under Obama! That's embarrassing.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right? What was Trump thinkin' starting that investigation before Biden even announced his candidacy? It's like Trump was investigating for the wrong reasons. SMH

You can use that line all you like, but it was well known Biden would be running and Biden was expected to be the heavy-hitter in the Dem lineup.

It's up to 75% now. They should just stop releasing info and wait until it's 100% done.

Pete and Bernie still in a virtual tie with a 1.7% difference.

Originally posted by snowdragon
In 2016 there were only 2 candidates in the Iowa caucus for the democrats, this year sanders competed with 9 that have actually gathered votes on the caucus page. I don't think Bernie undershot expectations, Pete had a good night though. It also seems as though the turnout was very similar to what it was in 2016.

It will be more telling in upcoming states because Pete's polling with latinos and blacks has been in single digits and if that doesn't change he can kiss Texas, California, Nevada goodbye.

If there is any take away from the Iowa caucus it's that Biden is a dud right now except in South Carolina.

Right now the delegates are 11 for pete and bernie, 5 for warren the rest 0.

Here is the problem with that calculus. Some of his supporters may have moved out of state, or gone to prison, or passed away, but that does not account for a 50% drop in votes. That means that at least half his 2016 voters either stayed home or switched to another candidate.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Ha watch Bloomberg just buy enough ads and get enough delegates in Texas and California to be a threat for the Democratic front runner.

Texas is around 288 delegates and California around 435.....Bloomberg could just totally avoid the first few states to avoid the scraps and go all in for the big win states.

That is precisely what he is doing, and why the DNC changed the requirements so that he would qualify for the debate stage.

They do not want to let him coast to the nomination using all of his considerable wealth to buy ads in the largest nominating states. They want him to have to compete with the other candidates on the debate stage, and try to neutralize that momentum.

Originally posted by Robtard
To SnowD and EI,

Fair enough there, 2016 was an entirely different playing field with only three candidates total, forgot about that.

Guess we will have to see when people start dropping, who siphons up the votes.

Bloomberg really seems like a DINO. Wouldn't be surprised if he's in this to assist Trump, if he can't win it. Trump's feed-the-rich policies help people like him.

Bloomberg is primarily concerned with defeating Trump. He is not convinced the other candidates can do it, which is why he is running. He is an actual self-made billionaire, who can discredit Trump's only claims to qualifications.

But he is not putting his eggs in one basket. He is investing enormous amounts of money in races for down-ticket Democrats to help them flip the Senate. If he does not get the nomination, he at least wants to hand them a Democratic Congress.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Here is the problem with that calculus. Some of his supporters may have moved out of state, or gone to prison, or passed away, but that does not account for a 50% drop in votes. That means that at least half his 2016 voters either stayed home or switched to another candidate.

What about voter turnout? Is is lower than in 2016 for the primary?

Originally posted by dadudemon
What about voter turnout? Is is lower than in 2016 for the primary?

It is a flatline: -8 in one demographic and +8 in another.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Bloomberg is primarily concerned with defeating Trump. He is not convinced the other candidates can do it, which is why he is running. He is an actual self-made billionaire, who can discredit Trump's only claims to qualifications.

This I can agree with: if someone gave me 1 million in startup capital, I'd have a software company profitable in 4 years with annual revenue between $5 million -$20 million a year.

Having a rich father is monstrously advantageous to starting your own successful company.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is a flatline: -8 in one demographic and +8 in another.

That's not good. Due to population changes, we should see at least a significant uptick.

This does not bode well for the general election.

Shit is not over until we get more states in the mix, however.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This I can agree with: if someone gave me 1 million in startup capital, I'd have a software company profitable in 4 years with annual revenue between $5 million -$20 million a year.

Having a rich father is monstrously advantageous to starting your own successful company.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's not good. Due to population changes, we should see at least a significant uptick.

This does not bode well for the general election.

Shit is not over until we get more states in the mix, however.

About 240,000 turned out for Obama/Clinton. It dropped to 170,000 for Clinton/Sanders, and it is still there now. Low voter participation is not good for the general election, but it is also an indictment of the central premise of the Sanders candidacy. He did not bring the Revolution. That is why his campaign always cites his number of individual donations, instead of his number of unique donors: it over-inflates their sense of his actual support. He has a ceiling of unique donors who contribute in small amounts over-and-over again. It adds up to a lot of money, and a large number of individual donations, but those are not 1:1 correspondent with actual voters.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right? What was Trump thinkin' starting that investigation before Biden even announced his candidacy? It's like Trump was investigating for the wrong reasons. SMH

Bingo, and the weasel excuse will be "Trump should have known he was running!". So now the goal posts are moved from "you can't investigate someone running for office" to "you can't investigate someone who might run".

Its hilarious.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Bloomberg is primarily concerned with defeating Trump. He is not convinced the other candidates can do it, which is why he is running. He is an actual self-made billionaire, who can discredit Trump's only claims to qualifications.

But he is not putting his eggs in one basket. He is investing enormous amounts of money in races for down-ticket Democrats to help them flip the Senate. If he does not get the nomination, he at least wants to hand them a Democratic Congress.

This is such a bullshit stance. You’re only mad because you hate Trump.

So you actually wants us to believe, just because Trump received helped from his father, he’s not deserving of talking about being a billionaire?

So I guess the next tine your child comes to you and say dad look, I got an A on my test, you look at your child and say, you didn’t get that A, I get that you that A because I helped you study.

Originally posted by SquallX
This is such a bullshit stance. You’re only mad because you hate Trump.

So you actually wants us to believe, just because Trump received helped from his father, he’s not deserving of talking about being a billionaire?

So I guess the next tine your child comes to you and say dad look, I got an A on my test, you look at your child and say, you didn’t get that A, I get that you that A because I helped you study.

For starters, there is no evidence Trump is an actual billionaire. He refuses to release his tax returns. Valuations of his wealth are literally based on his own word. And he testified under oath that he estimates his net worth based on his feelings. Independent auditors believe he is only worth millions, and he inherited millions to start with.

Who cares