The 2020 Presidential Election Primary Thread

[beefytee]

Obviously, there is more Lenin in Bernie than Hitler in Trump. Trump has not been videotaped extolling Nazi Germany as Bernie has been recorded extolling the Soviet Union, the dreadful regime of which Lenin, himself a mass murderer, was the father. For all Trump's faults and all the awful things he has said, Trump does not claim to be a Democratic Nazi. Yet with impunity his enemies compare him to Hitler. Many Bernie bros embrace Lenin as an inspiration.

And thus we are in the death spiral of "Sure my side isn't great, but I will put up with it because the other side is soooo much worse." as each side continues to get worse and worse. </DebbyDownerRant>

How do we get out of this?

[SeattleUte]

And thus we are in the death spiral of "Sure my side isn't great, but I will put up with it because the other side is soooo much worse." as each side continues to get worse and worse. </DebbyDownerRant>

How do we get out of this?

The system may deliver us two intolerable candidates, and require us to choose the lesser of two evils. It's probably what we deserve.

[cowboy]

You may think it's just dandy for a heart attack or cancer patient with no insurance to get a 100k bill and have to beg the hospital for a discount or forgiveness of the loan, or, failing that, seek bankruptcy protection so he can feed his family. Or, for an inner city uninsured mother to have to take her kid with the flu to the emergency room and beg for treatment. I think it's callous if not cruel, and with this attitude you're defining yourself as possessing all the negative characteristics with which urbanites caricaturize cowboys from Wyoming.

This attitude is also why we have a big risk of electing a communist next election. Had Republicans supported the ACA--again, with private markets, state regulation, and choice--there would be no Communist campaign built on single payor that is the democratic front runner. Get real.

I asked you simple questions in an honest effort to understand the basis of your opinion regarding the ACA. I also tried to explain why I think it is a step backwards. You responded by refusing to give foundation for your opinion, and opted instead to simply re-state my opinion with duplicity and hyperbole. Frankly, I thought you were above using the debate tactics of a second-rate political spin doctor, but apparently not. You're smarter than I am, so why are you relying on deflection and strawmen instead of just discussing the subject rationally? I was honestly asking questions in an attempt to have a civil discussion, so lets try this again.

1) I have neither stated nor implied that I think any of the examples you gave are "just dandy".

2) Speaking of your two quoted examples, the ACA does nothing to change the situations of these hypothetical patients. Also, nobody has to "beg for treatment" in the ER. For years, the law has required people who present themselves at the ER be seen and treated regardless of ability to pay.

3) (Tit for tat alert) By mischaracterizing my motives and opinions, you've defined yourself as possessing all the negative characteristics with which flyover people caricaturize the urban elitists. This attitude is why we have Trump in the White House.

4) The Republicans had absolutely zero ability to provide input in the ACA, and private markets and choice have decreased, not increased, under the legislation. Lest you think I'm defending the GOP, they refused to allow pooling across state lines, so they are also complicit in this mess.

5) I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions instead of just dismissing them by implying I'm an ignorant redneck.

[creekster]

The system may deliver us two intolerable candidates, and require us to choose the lesser of two evils. It's probably what we deserve.

That's far too passive. The system doesn't deliver anything. We deliver it to ourselves. The system is our own creation meant to force us to consider candidates over time and rationally so as not to be swept up in the emotions of some movement or another, and to make sure we have a choice. The system is merely our own effort to give the better side of our nature a chance to rule the worse side of our nature. I worry that we are pandering far too much to the worse side these days, across the spectrum, in entertainment, education, discourse and public life, and so our better side is unable to manifest fully in our candidates.

[SeattleUte]

The author photographed with a graven image of Bernie's idol.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4787722002?__twitter_impression=true

[Goatnapper'96]

That's far too passive. The system doesn't deliver anything. We deliver it to ourselves. The system is our own creation meant to force us to consider candidates over time and rationally so as not to be swept up in the emotions of some movement or another, and to make sure we have a choice. The system is merely our own effort to give the better side of our nature a chance to rule the worse side of our nature. I worry that we are pandering far too much to the worse side these days, across the spectrum, in entertainment, education, discourse and public life, and so our better side is unable to manifest fully in our candidates.

Good post. I tried to get a fellar protesting President Trump with a sign that said "F%*k Trump!" to recognize his role in facilitating us being desensitized to Donald Trump the human. I failed miserably, but I do chuckle when I hear Bill Maher complaining about the President.

[BlueK]

There is one thing to keep in mind with Bernie -- similar to Trump in 2016, he fills one lane while most of the other candidates fight over the other. Like Trump, his hardcore base appears to be about 25% of the party. For that reason it's easy to make the comparison and assume he almost has the nomination in the bag if the rest stay in the race much longer. However, there is a major difference between the parties when it comes to the primaries that will make it harder for Bernie, and which I'm sure both he and the Trump side will love to fan the flames about when Sanders doesn't wrap up the nomination so easily.

The difference is that on the Republican side, most of the primaries after IA and NH are winner take all or winner take almost all. It's designed like that to crown a winner quickly. But on the dem side it isn't like that -- every state is proportional. Also, because he is a revolutionary rather than just a garden variety liberal, I think Bernie definitely has a ceiling, and probably a lower one than Trump did. So because of that and because of the structure of the primaries I think the chances are pretty good that it goes to the convention without anyone getting to 50%. Bloomberg is polling well in the Super Tuesday states and could very well come away on that day alone with a large enough chunk of delegates to keep anyone from 50%. IMO, Bernie won't get the nomination but he can do a lot of damage to whoever does get it.

I voted early in Texas yesterday for Bloomberg because he will still be a factor by March 3rd, and to make sure to record a vote not for Bernie.

[SeattleUte]

There is one thing to keep in mind with Bernie -- similar to Trump in 2016, he fills one lane while most of the other candidates fight over the other. Like Trump, his hardcore base appears to be about 25% of the party. For that reason it's easy to make the comparison and assume he almost has the nomination in the bag if the rest stay in the race much longer. However, there is a major difference between the parties when it comes to the primaries that will make it harder for Bernie, and which I'm sure both he and the Trump side will love to fan the flames about when Sanders doesn't wrap up the nomination so easily.

The difference is that on the Republican side, most of the primaries after IA and NH are winner take all or winner take almost all. It's designed like that to crown a winner quickly. But on the dem side it isn't like that -- every state is proportional. Because he is a revolutionary rather than just a garden variety liberal, I think Bernie definitely has a ceiling, and probably a lower one than Trump did. So because of that and because of the structure of the primaries I think the chances are pretty good that it goes to the convention without anyone getting to 50%. Bloomberg is polling well in the Super Tuesday states and could very well come away on that day alone with a large enough chunk of delegates to keep anyone from 50%. IMO, Bernie won't get the nomination but he can do a lot of damage to whoever does get it.

The problem with the democratic system is that it encourages Biden etc. to hang on and continue to clog the moderate lane in hopes that they will emerge from the Convention with a brokered nomination. Then what happens when the Bernie Bros try to extort the democratic party, threatening to abandon the nominee or support Trump (much like they did in '16)? There may even be a riot like in 68. Bernie Bros will bring their yellow vests, brass knucks and clubs to the Convention.

Democrats need to emerge from the primaries with a clear moderate choice, like Hilary was.

[BlueK]

The problem with the democratic system is that it encourages Biden etc. to hang on and continue to clog the moderate lane in hopes that they will emerge from the Convention with a brokered nomination. Then what happens when the Bernie Bros try to extort the democratic party, threatening to abandon the nominee or support Trump (much like they did in '16)? There may even be a riot like in 68. Bernie Bros will bring their yellow vests, brass knucks and clubs to the Convention.

Democrats need to emerge from the primaries with a clear moderate choice, like Hilary was.

I think Biden will bow out pretty soon and will endorse Bloomberg. I don't think he wanted it badly enough from the beginning but jumped in because no one else was there to run as a moderate. I thought he was a viable choice at first, but you just can't take 4th or 5th in the first two states if you're supposed to be the frontrunner.

[SeattleUte]

I think Biden will bow out pretty soon and will endorse Bloomberg. I don't think he wanted it badly enough from the beginning but jumped in because no one else was there to run as a moderate. I thought he was a viable choice at first, but you just can't take 4th or 5th in the first two states if you're supposed to be the frontrunner.

This will test whether Biden loves America or the democratic party more than himself.

Tonight's debate is one of those pivotal events in the never-ending pursuit for freedom. Somewhat like 6/6/44. It's distressing how much these debates matter. I can't imagine the stress on Bloomberg. The other three moderates are literally dead.

[Donuthole]

This will test whether Biden loves America or the democratic party more than himself.

Tonight's debate is one of those pivotal events in the never-ending pursuit for freedom. Somewhat like 6/6/44. It's distressing how much these debates matter. I can't imagine the stress on Bloomberg. The other three moderates are literally dead.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This will test whether Biden loves America or the democratic party more than himself.

Tonight's debate is one of those pivotal events in the never-ending pursuit for freedom. Somewhat like 6/6/44. It's distressing how much these debates matter. I can't imagine the stress on Bloomberg. The other three moderates are literally dead.

How sad.

[BlueK]

Biden's firewall appears to have come down. If a result like this happens he needs to drop out the next day. I can maybe excuse him for waiting until then, but Nevada also probably won't go well.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...mary-6824.html

[SeattleUte]

Biden's firewall appears to have come down. If this happens he needs to drop out the next day.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...mary-6824.html

Ironically, winning in SC may not be good for Bernie. Like a virus killing too many of its hosts. Lots of related ironies here, though.

[creekster]

Warren starts off with a full broadside on Bloomberg. As does Klobuchar. This is sort of amusing.