g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });

2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,611
Location
Hollywood CA
Surely the DNC can recognise that that’s the absolute worst thing they could possibly do right now?

If that happens they fracture the base hugely and create a left vs centre wedge that will hurt massively in November.

Getting Warren to back Bernie when it’s not going to stop all their other shenanigans in getting Biden in is a much better move in the grand scheme of things
The DNC wouldn’t have any influence on this. It would be Warren’s call on what she wants to do (which would logically be to endorse Sanders).
 

nimic

something nice
Scout
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
31,931
Location
And I'm all out of bubblegum.
Is it really a huge conspiracy that both did terribly in the primary the day before and had zero chance of doing anything on Super Tuesday so they dropped out and endorsed someone similar to them who could do better? Isn't that just sensible? Now instead of the narrative being about Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out after awful Super Tuesdays they get some reflected glory. It's just sensible.

I mean what exactly is the suggestion here, they should drag out their campaign so Bernie can do better? If he's such a strong candidate why does he need 4 moderates splitting the vote? I just don't understand it.
I'm not saying it's a huge conspiracy, but I am saying this is what people with access to the inside (like journalists) are suggesting happened. In any case, I'm not sure I buy your analysis. I don't think there was any reflected glory to be had here. As soon as the other moderates dropped out, it was all about Biden, 24/7. I think the incentive for the moderates was staying on the good side of the Party, for the future.
 

Redplane

( . Y . ) planned for Christmas
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
10,508
Location
The Royal Kingdom of Trumpistan
Not sure if this was mentioned/discussed yet but with Governor Whitner of MI endorsing Biden ahead of the MI primary it seems like Bernie is likely to be dead in the water now. She is a very popular element in the party now as is evident from them allowing her to respond to the SOTU and could see many in MI to change their intended vote from Bernie to Biden now (including absentee voters). Before this and given the results in MI for Bernie last time I'd have given him a shot and while he will stilldo well - people are now actively being reminded that Biden of course was VP when the White House stepped in to "save" the auto industry. Even so I'm not sure if Biden spent much time in MI so far which seems odd. I know Bernie has rallies in Grand Rapids and Detroit.
 

Hamnat

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
1,537
Location
Texas
Is it really a huge conspiracy that both did terribly in the primary the day before and had zero chance of doing anything on Super Tuesday so they dropped out and endorsed someone similar to them who could do better? Isn't that just sensible? Now instead of the narrative being about Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out after awful Super Tuesdays they get some reflected glory. It's just sensible.

I mean what exactly is the suggestion here, they should drag out their campaign so Bernie can do better? Neither of them had a chance to win, I know that, you know that, they know that. There was no reason for them to stay on. Regardless if Sanders is such a strong candidate why does he need 4 moderates splitting the vote? I just don't understand it.
I am struggling with the logic as well. Anyone with eyes could see if you added up the split moderate votes they were getting in poll after poll they were eating their own strength. Its just common sense to consolidate. They didn't have to make major policy compromises cause they were in the same lane. They wanted the same things pretty much. I don't see the "nefarious" conspiracy in making the strategic decisions to consolidate. They were broke even Biden barely had enough money to contest. Only Sanders and Bloomberg self funding were in decent shape. Biden won states Tuesday he didn't even have an office or spend money in because he couldn't afford to and had to be strategic with spending.

They had absolutely nothing to gain continuing to drive with flat tires and no gas. Finding something shady in obvious decisions? I mean were they just supposed to keep trudging along and hand Sanders the nomination with no fight?
 

JulesWinnfield

West Brom Fan
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,501
I'm not saying it's a huge conspiracy, but I am saying this is what people with access to the inside (like journalists) are suggesting happened. In any case, I'm not sure I buy your analysis. I don't think there was any reflected glory to be had here. As soon as the other moderates dropped out, it was all about Biden, 24/7. I think the incentive for the moderates was staying on the good side of the Party.
Well yeah, it kind was - though not the party, getting in good with the presumptive nominee. I think this is a fundamental thing that separates the two sides. To Sanders this is a terrible thing to do because compromising is a huge no-no, to moderates compromising is how you get some of what you want instead of none of what you want. Buttigieg dropping out early can leverage himself to a stronger position with Biden. Push some of his policies, probably get a role with him. Warren and Sanders should have worked this out as well.

It's why progressives almost always fail. Had Sanders and Warren been pragmatic back at the start of February when she clearly wasn't a viable candidate she could have leveraged herself into a strong position with him. That didn't happen for one reason or another and now they'll both pay the price for it. The moderates were willing to compromise and will likely be rewarded for it.
 

ChaddyP

Full Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2011
Messages
13,852
Location
Jamaica
the endorsements coalesced biden's vote very stongly, if something similar happened with warren sanders would have a delegate lead of a couple of hundred, after winning minn, mass, maine, texas, and smashing california.

I'm not so sure Warren would have helped him win texas. I give you Mass and maybe Maine though.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,839
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
The DNC wouldn’t any influence on this. It would be Warren’s call on what she wants to do (which would logically be to endorse Sanders).
Disagree, I think it will be coordinated. I'm not talking in conspiracy terms either it just makes sense at this point to do whatever will help the party's chances in November.
 

berbatrick

Renaissance Man
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
21,824
Is it really a huge conspiracy that both did terribly in the primary the day before and had zero chance of doing anything on Super Tuesday so they dropped out and endorsed someone similar to them who could do better? Isn't that just sensible? Now instead of the narrative being about Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out after awful Super Tuesdays they get some reflected glory. It's just sensible.

I mean what exactly is the suggestion here, they should drag out their campaign so Bernie can do better? Neither of them had a chance to win, I know that, you know that, they know that. There was no reason for them to stay on. Regardless if Sanders is such a strong candidate why does he need 4 moderates splitting the vote? I just don't understand it.
do the same for warren, she didn't even match pete's numbers and she did worse than amy in NH.

...

A few months back someone said that the crowded field is perfect for the establishment, I thought they were wrong. Anyway here is the theory -
By giving voters different things (Obama nostalgia and an electable old white man, Obama but gay this time, a woman progressive with the plans and not the shouting, a young black woman lawyer, and whatever Klobuchar appeals to, you take away as much of the non-committed bloc as possible. As soon as the elections start and a frontrunner emerges, they unite. At that time, it looked like they'd unite behind Biden or Warren.

This didn't happen so I thought, yup, I was right and this theory was wrong, this was too much chaos for the establishment. But the reason it didn't happen was becausethe first two states chose the wrong guy, the one who had the least chance of beating Bernie with non-white voters. That's why the Clyburn endorsement and then the single day of unity, just before voting. And Pete has done his job by denying Bernie the Iowa headline, and Warren by denying him a very crucially times endorsement. So maybe the theory is true, IDK.
 

berbatrick

Renaissance Man
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
21,824
Insulting people is the best way to avoid that?
because people were angry with her for her decisions since late Jan and responded in that way, and the damage done by those responses is insinificant compared to the damage done by her choices.
 

Member 90887

Guest
Polls taken before Supet Tuesday are beyond meaningless at this point. As far I can see there are no recent polls for those states but Michigan which he absolutely needs to do well in and was previously polling well in is now also to polling for Biden.

Biden's surge was nationwide so that will have to disappear in the space of a week, but there's not a great deal that can be done to combat it at the moment. There's no fertile Sanders territory to get the momentum back between now and Tuesday. If he doesn't win and win pretty soundly on Tuesday in all likelihood its all over for him as he'll almost certainly be in for some crushing defeats with the likes of Florida and Georgia coming up. Merely competing in Illinois and Ohio wouldn't be enough. It's possible he manages to wrestle back some iniative but that will be extremely difficult with very limited time to campaign.

You also have to take into account even with his storming results on Super Tuesday Bloomberg has dropped out since and they will almost all go to Biden as well. Warren dropping out might help him a bit but a lot of Warren's support are ex-Clinton voters so the gain from that will probably be minimal, although an endorsement might help.

Essentially the issue for Sanders is there's nowhere really left where he will get a crushing majority (with a decent number of delegates), but there are multiple places where Biden will crush him. The other states the way delegates are split makes it difficult to make up numbers. That's why it was so crucial that Sanders came out of Super Tuesday with a decent lead.

The first point makes sense. Biden's tuesday's victory will definitly have an impact on what's coming. Still, we don't really know what might happen in the next two weeks. Not a lot of people predicted Biden's surge. So let's see.

It's crazy how people are swayed not by the platform that they believe in, but the hype each condidate gets at a certain point.

I am pretty sure that a majority of voters don't have a clear idea of what each candidate stands for.
 

DOTA

wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
24,504
If Warren had any sense of humour she'd endorse Tulsi.
 

JulesWinnfield

West Brom Fan
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,501
do the same for warren, she didn't even match pete's numbers and she did worse than amy in NH.

...

A few months back someone said that the crowded field is perfect for the establishment, I thought they were wrong. Anyway here is the theory -
By giving voters different things (Obama nostalgia and a safe old white man, Obama but gay this time, a woman progressive with the plans and not the shouting, a young black woman lawyer, and whatever Klobuchar appeals to, you take away as much of the non-committed bloc as possible. As soon as the elections start and a frontrunner emerges, they unite. At that time, it looked like they'd unite behind Biden or Warren.

This didn't happen so I thought, yup, I was right and this theory was wrong, this was too much chaos for the establishment. But the reason it didn't happen was becausethe first two states chose the wrong guy, the one who had the least chance of beating Bernie with non-white voters. That's why the Clyburn endorsement and then the single day of unity, just before voting. And Pete has done his job by denying Bernie the Iowa headline, and Warren by denying him a very crucially times endorsement. So maybe the theory is true, IDK.
This is veering far too much into conspiracy territory. Buttigieg's entire tactic was to win Iowa and/or New Hampshire and leverage the press from that into gaining support. Unfortunately for him the chaos of Iowa became the story and Bloomberg's late entrance into the race dominated a lot of February so he didn't get the media bounce expected. His tactics were merely what Obama's were back in '08. He didn't get the nationwide bounce though so he dropped out. There were many candidates precisely because there was no obvious favourite so a lot of people chanced their arm. Naturally those who weren't getting anywhere drop out pretty swiftly.

I can't speak for why Warren hasn't dropped out yet but it speaks to my post that moderates willigness to compromise is why they almost do better than progressives.
 

crappycraperson

"Resident cricket authority"
Scout
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
38,194
Location
Interweb
This is just political malpractice. Bernie should have at least tried to get Clyburn's endorsement.

Hubris. They clearly got swayed by the polls and big win in Nevada and thought anti-establishment message was enough to keep the campaign going.
 

nimic

something nice
Scout
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
31,931
Location
And I'm all out of bubblegum.
Well yeah, it kind was - though not the party, getting in good with the presumptive nominee. I think this is a fundamental thing that separates the two sides. To Sanders this is a terrible thing to do because compromising is a huge no-no, to moderates compromising is how you get some of what you want instead of none of what you want. Buttigieg dropping out early can leverage himself to a stronger position with Biden. Push some of his policies, probably get a role with him. Warren and Sanders should have worked this out as well.

It's why progressives almost always fail. Had Sanders and Warren been pragmatic back at the start of February when she clearly wasn't a viable candidate she could have leveraged herself into a strong position with him. That didn't happen for one reason or another and now they'll both pay the price for it. The moderates were willing to compromise and will likely be rewarded for it.
Thing is, one week ago this would have been the opposite of what was happening. The only reason Bernie was the front-runner in the first place was because the moderates didn't play nice with each other. By all rights, there should not have been this many candidates around almost up until Super Tuesday. You're painting a very pretty picture of progressives who are unable to cooperate and moderates who are pragmatic and cooperative, putting it neatly into your theory of "why progressives almost always fail", but the evidence so far in this campaign hasn't matched that at all. The only time it has matched it is right now, when there's clearly been some pressure behind the scenes.

I also disagree that this has more to do with Biden than the party. It probably does have something to do with getting in the good graces of Biden, but Biden alone couldn't organize this. The Party (capital P) was definitely involved.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,611
Location
Hollywood CA
Seriously, what was Warren's play in staying through the ST? And I don't, for a second, believe their talk about getting a bit of delegates and then fighting it out at the convention.
The same could be said for Klobuchar. These people have other political priorities (such as buying themselves a bit of leverage for potential VP slots etc).
 

crappycraperson

"Resident cricket authority"
Scout
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
38,194
Location
Interweb
i explained it to crappy in some detail, regarding how warren's strategy was similar to pete's and amy's, while bloomberg's wasn't, and how those 2 showed loyalty and got results whle she her staying in led to a total reversal.



be careful you sound like a bro, treat this swing voter in a swing state with respect or you never know what might happen! if only bidencels weren't so toxic, we'd happily vote for him!!!
It was not about strategy. Donor class on whom Pete and Amy will rely on in future, directed them to consolidated when they did. They do not have same sway over Warren. As per some section of the press, it was Obama who got that pressure put on Pete and Amy.
 

fishfingers15

Contributes to username and tagline changes
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
27,115
Location
YESHHHHH, We'll GOOO for it.
Overall yes, but Warren dropping out could have had enough effect for Bernie in Massachusetts and California.
Would Warren have given Bernie a boost by endorsing him before super tuesday? Undeniably yes. Is she obligated to take one for the team to ensure Bernie's success after not winning a single state and contesting in just 4? I would say no. It would be as idiotic as someone saying Sanders should have stepped down for the progressive cause after the heart attack.

I have no idea what Sanders campaign did to engage people like Warren and Clyburn but the best way to get Warren to drop out is not by tweeting snakes and hurling abuses at her.

Politicians making deals with each other is conspiracy theory territory? That’s rather naive.
Of course, but you speculating that DNC was definitely involved to get Warren not to drop out to hurt Sanders is a bit of a fantasy. She may endorse Sanders and maybe you'll call her a Salamander instead of a snake :lol:
 

JulesWinnfield

West Brom Fan
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,501
Thing is, one week ago this would have been the opposite of what was happening. The only reason Bernie was the front-runner in the first place was because the moderates didn't play nice with each other. By all rights, there should not have been this many candidates around almost up until Super Tuesday.

You're painting a very pretty picture of progressives who are unable to cooperate and moderates who are pragmatic and cooperative, putting it neatly into your theory of "why progressives almost always fail", but the evidence so far in this campaign hasn't matched that at all. The only time it has matched it is right now, when there's clearly been some pressure behind the scenes. I disagree that this is doesn't have to do with the Party, but actually with Biden. It probably does have something to do with getting in the good graces of Biden, but Biden alone couldn't organize this. The Party (capital P) was definitely involved.
They were competing to see who could be the frontrunner prior to Super Tuesday then coalesced behind the one who had the best chance. Neither Klobuchar and Buttigieg cracked the minority support so they dropped out for the candidate who did. The amount of delegates on offer before super tuesday is so minimal they are basically just a chance to get the frontrunner tag but essentially meaningless in the amount of delegates on offer. They waited until all signs were dead and dropped out before doing serious damage to a preferential candidate.

Progressives will fail again and again and again while they continually fail to learn the lessons of the primaries. Sanders has had 4 years(!) to focus on building bridges instead or ramping up rhetoric against Democrats, he didn't, he had 4 years to expand his base to older (particularly black) voters, he didn't, he had 4 years for him and Warren to come to some sort of agreement knowing they would split the vote, they didn't.
 

nimic

something nice
Scout
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
31,931
Location
And I'm all out of bubblegum.
Your explanation is way too neat, and it just doesn't fit the actual events of the campaign. You've got an idea of how it works (or should work), and you've made the events fit it. We're going around in circles, so I'll just leave it at that.
 

fishfingers15

Contributes to username and tagline changes
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
27,115
Location
YESHHHHH, We'll GOOO for it.
i explained it to crappy in some detail, regarding how warren's strategy was similar to pete's and amy's, while bloomberg's wasn't, and how those 2 showed loyalty and got results whle she her staying in led to a total reversal.



be careful you sound like a bro, treat this swing voter in a swing state with respect or you never know what might happen! if only bidencels weren't so toxic, we'd happily vote for him!!!
feck sake, I'd visit him with a beer keg but he's in Colorado at the moment :(
 

JulesWinnfield

West Brom Fan
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
1,501
Yes, I look forward to 4-8 years time when AOC or whoever the chosen ones campaign is fails again and instead of an iota of introspection, all the blame goes to the shadowy DNC for the crime of......not running 5 moderate candidates so the progressive can win with 25% of the vote.
 

fishfingers15

Contributes to username and tagline changes
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
27,115
Location
YESHHHHH, We'll GOOO for it.
The amount of endorsements that Biden has had and the dropouts coordinated with Super Tuesday has certainly been coordinated. No organic momentum spreads that way. Whether Warren should have seen the picture and dropped out to consolidate the lead to Sanders is a difficult question to answer. Supporters of Bernie Sanders laying the failure somehow on Warren for splitting the vote is entirely comical.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,611
Location
Hollywood CA
Disagree, I think it will be coordinated. I'm not talking in conspiracy terms either it just makes sense at this point to do whatever will help the party's chances in November.
It could be coordinated with Biden, but that’s politics. People routinely cooperate with one another to advance one another’s interests.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,978
Location
London
Bernie is dead in the water unless the Pro-Trump media starts spinning the "Biden is slow/unhealthy" reports more dominantly and it gets some traction.
Or Warren drops out and direct all her vocal female supporters to drum up support for Sanders instead of against him. I fear she might make a "vice-presedental" deal with Biden.

DNC want Biden. Trump + allies want Biden. The corporate world + influential rich people want anybody but Bernie --> Trump and Biden are perfect for them.

The cases most voters seem to care about (Healthcare, a living wage, Climate) strangely does not seem to have any impact on their voting given that Bernie(+Warren) is not far above the rest.
Nope. He has tweeted mostly against Biden, and almost has shown sympathy towards Bernie.

Fox has gone in full attack mode against Biden too. I think it is clear that Biden is the only candidate that Trump and GOP fear. Especially now that somehow he managed to get a very high turnout in primaries.
 

Florida Man

Cartoon expert and crap superhero
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
13,944
Location
Florida, man
Would Warren have given Bernie a boost by endorsing him before super tuesday? Undeniably yes. Is she obligated to take one for the team to ensure Bernie's success after not winning a single state and contesting in just 4? I would say no. It would be as idiotic as someone saying Sanders should have stepped down for the progressive cause after the heart attack.

I have no idea what Sanders campaign did to engage people like Warren and Clyburn but the best way to get Warren to drop out is not by tweeting snakes and hurling abuses at her.



Of course, but you speculating that DNC was definitely involved to get Warren not to drop out to hurt Sanders is a bit of a fantasy. She may endorse Sanders and maybe you'll call her a Salamander instead of a snake :lol:
I highly doubt Warren or any sensible politician makes their decision based on a few mean tweets. If being called a snake really gets to her, she has no business being a politician let alone President. Bernie and Obama for example got called far worse things than snake.

On the premise that the DNC really really hates Bernie, which is as clear as day, it’s not out of the question they wanted her to stay. Observe her actions. Lying about her Native heritage. Hiring Clinton people. Bringing up non-verified gossip from two years ago to damage Bernie’s image. Backing off medicare for all. Pointlessly attacking Bernie in debates and in numerous speeches. And with literally no path to victory, stayed through ST. Remember who advises her. Clinton people are fecking sociopathic.

Edit: salamanders are cool!
 

Florida Man

Cartoon expert and crap superhero
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
13,944
Location
Florida, man
People here know full well that the GOP conspires heavily for Trump, but Democrats, no — they would never do such a thing because they only play fair. This is the vibe I’m getting from some here.
 

berbatrick

Renaissance Man
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
21,824
It was not about strategy. Donor class on whom Pete and Amy will rely on in future, directed them to consolidated when they did. They do not have same sway over Warren. As per some section of the press, it was Obama who got that pressure put on Pete and Amy.
by strategy i meant winning early in iowa/nh and strengthening from there. bloomberg's strategy was super tuesday only. and yes, donors, party, their own commitment, whatever it was, i admire it. once more i will look longingly at a photo of amit shah and pray they make a leftist version of him sometime. someone who understands and uses power.
 

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
23,886
Location
New York City
Is it really a huge conspiracy that both did terribly in the primary the day before and had zero chance of doing anything on Super Tuesday so they dropped out and endorsed someone similar to them who could do better? Isn't that just sensible? Now instead of the narrative being about Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropping out after awful Super Tuesdays they get some reflected glory. It's just sensible.

I mean what exactly is the suggestion here, they should drag out their campaign so Bernie can do better? Neither of them had a chance to win, I know that, you know that, they know that. There was no reason for them to stay on. Regardless if Sanders is such a strong candidate why does he need 4 moderates splitting the vote? I just don't understand it.
That's not how it worked Jules.
 

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
23,886
Location
New York City
It was not about strategy. Donor class on whom Pete and Amy will rely on in future, directed them to consolidated when they did. They do not have same sway over Warren. As per some section of the press, it was Obama who got that pressure put on Pete and Amy.
Bingo!!!
 

berbatrick

Renaissance Man
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
21,824
folks twitter doesn't matter.
this is actually an attack on me, a warren supporting twitter user who is being invisibilised. i like bernie's plans but he can't control his followers, how will he control the country? #bluewave2020 #biden2020
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,611
Location
Hollywood CA
People here know full well that the GOP conspires heavily for Trump, but Democrats, no — they would never do such a thing because they only play fair. This is the vibe I’m getting from some here.
That’s because Trump has seized complete control of the Republican Party and declared martial law. No such construct exists on the Dem side.
 

Suedesi

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
23,886
Location
New York City
This is just political malpractice. Bernie should have at least tried to get Clyburn's endorsement.

Clyburn gets money from healthcare companies. Do you think if Bernie's team did reach out to Clyburn he would have endorsed?

This Monday night quarterbacking is getting annoying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.