2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

[Bienenhalde]

I actually had an interesting talk with someone the other day and he raised some good points that, depending on the actions taken during the primary, Biden might actually not be a super guaranteed win. If Biden pushes too far to the left to try and win over the younger progressive wing during the primaries it could seriously haunt him into the general and alienate much needed older Dem voters in places like the Rust Belt.

CNN ran a piece that was somewhat similar the other night where they talked to older voters in that same region and they were seemingly all against the AOC style super progressive types and more in favor of Trump if it came down to it.

Friendly reminder that Americans aren't policy wonks and most of their issues with politicians is tonal and superficial. Of course, the base and the activists within the party need policy to placate them, but so long as Biden can manage to keep his campy uncle vibe going, then he'll be fine.

Of course I have my doubts that he'll actually win the primary, but we'll see.

Few people may study the fine details of policy, but that does not mean they do not care about policy at all. If Biden were to support a policy that was really controversial or unpopular it could really hurt him. I personally like Biden and would support him against Trump, but I would prefer that he campaigns on a moderate, pragmatic platform and focuses on electability in the general as opposed to pandering to far-left wackos.

[Farnhamia]

I will likely vote for Republicans in my state, but at a national level, like the previous election, I will not vote for Donald Trump. I do not believe in a lesser-of-two-evils argument, and only in seeing whether or not an individual passes a personal, ethical litmus test that I pass on them in my mind. If yes, then they can be compared to their peers. I am aware that the American election system does not de facto allow for a third-party victory, and I am more than willing to "throw my vote away" to know that I didn't give my opinion to an individual I find repugnant.

I would vote for a Democrat if I deemed them ethical and they held views similar to mine. Otherwise, I'll likely find a third-party candidate to vote for.

I must say I completely agree with this. I am fed up with Trump, fed up with the Democrats, and fed up with the two party system.

What are you doing to change it?

[Hardholm]

I must say I completely agree with this. I am fed up with Trump, fed up with the Democrats, and fed up with the two party system.

What are you doing to change it?

In my opinion, (and I Don't know if you were actually asking me, so sorry to interject if not) I believe I am morally required to operate within the legal bounds set up by my nation's authority. Christians are supposed to respect the authority over them and not have a spirit of rebelliousness. That means that, short of being made to do something against our faith, we should follow the laws. Therefore, in essence, nothing of value within the system itself. I don't think voting will ever achieve a long-term victory for my side, but I do feel an obligation to continue doing so. It is a confounding situation, but it is the one I was given

[Ifreann]

I must say I completely agree with this. I am fed up with Trump, fed up with the Democrats, and fed up with the two party system.

What are you doing to change it?

Posting on the internet, the highest form of activism any of us can aspire to.

[Bienenhalde]

I must say I completely agree with this. I am fed up with Trump, fed up with the Democrats, and fed up with the two party system.

What are you doing to change it?

Well, Sorry that I have not done much yet...but there is no simple easy answer. I suppose we need to spend some time thinking about and studying the problem so we can figure out the best course of action.

[Myrensis]

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

And just like the Republicans did to Obama.

Please don't feed the false equivalency trolls, the GOP desperately depends on people buying into that "Yeah, we shot their dog in the head and threw it on their porch, but they called our cat ugly, so are they really any better?" bullshit.

Yes, Democrats hated Bush, because just like Trump he took the White House in spite of the Democratic candidate getting more votes..and still they never approached nearly the level of hysterical 'obstruction for the sake of obstruction, we'll filibuster ourselves if we have to, as long as it spites the President!" that was the only coherent GOP policy during the Obama Administration.

Or Clinton for that matter. Have been perpetually amused by all the selective amnesiac conservatives wailing and clutching their pearls about how they never thought they'd see the day America would fall so far that a political party would launch an investigative 'witch hunt' in a desperate attempt to oust a duly elected President with a frivolous impeachment!

[Ifreann]

Posting on the internet, the highest form of activism any of us can aspire to.

*Coughs*

Maybe see a doctor about that cough.

[Bienenhalde]

Fuck all the politicians, I can't put my trust in those lads anymore.

;-;

I thought we were bros.

Stahp discriminating against muh kind.

Not a fan of mainstream American politics in general, but you I like.

[Nouveau Yathrib]

I donated $1 to Andrew Yang’s campaign and $5 to Jay Inslee’s. Not because I think either will realistically win the nomination, but because they’re talking about issues we really need to be taking action on, namely automation and climate change.

[Republic of Penguinian Astronautia]

I must say I completely agree with this. I am fed up with Trump, fed up with the Democrats, and fed up with the two party system.

What are you doing to change it?

Ranked choice voting, abolish electoral College, fair representation act, minimum area anti gerrymandering principle, liquid democracy. Stuff we can't or won't do.

[Yusseria]

There is reason to be even angrier in 2020 than in even 2016. There is a good chance that Trump will lose but 2016 has at least shown me that polls are a bunch of BS and that it can pay off to stick with someone to the very end. Yes, I absolutely abhor how Trump can't embrace getting off of fossil fuels. But the alternative is that the US will become diverse at an even faster pace than if Trump is in office doing a lot to curb undesirable immigration.

I was here in 2016, chief. You weren't angry. You were giddy as a schoolgirl for Clinton to win. Then Trump won and you jumped ship immediately and started posting about how you regretted not sticking with Trump. Which is really weird, because usually you're all about your racist politics, but you totally abandoned them to try and "be on the winning team".

---

Sure you do, an ideologically friendlier government.

Don't you remember 2016? Saiwania supported Trump at first, the switched to Clinton very openly because the polls predicted that she would win. Dude wasn't supporting the candidate friendliest to his ideology, he was clearly supporting the candidate he thought would win.

---

She also decided to jump on the reparations bandwagon.

I really don't get why every idiot Democrat is supporting reparations now. Quickest way to alienate white voters. But they've made it pretty clear they don't care about appealing to the white working class anymore.

And they wonder why the white working class votes mostly Republican now.

I guess they're putting their beliefs about justice ahead of political expediency.

Their beliefs are incredibly misguided and stupid, as are yours.

[Ifreann]

I was here in 2016, chief. You weren't angry. You were giddy as a schoolgirl for Clinton to win. Then Trump won and you jumped ship immediately and started posting about how you regretted not sticking with Trump. Which is really weird, because usually you're all about your racist politics, but you totally abandoned them to try and "be on the winning team".

---

Don't you remember 2016? Saiwania supported Trump at first, the switched to Clinton very openly because the polls predicted that she would win. Dude wasn't supporting the candidate friendliest to his ideology, he was clearly supporting the candidate he thought would win.

---

I guess they're putting their beliefs about justice ahead of political expediency.

Their beliefs are incredibly misguided and stupid, as are yours.

Just in general, or is there something specific I said in that post that you object to?

[Yusseria]

Their beliefs are incredibly misguided and stupid, as are yours.

Just in general, or is there something specific I said in that post that you object to?

All of it, but your reparations fetishism in particular.

[Forsher]

From a different thread (brought here due to threadjacking concerns):

He's an enormously unpopular (presumptive) candidate for the party with a smaller base who won only due to the peculiarities of the US electoral system last time when competing against another enormously unpopular candidate and you're "not too worried"?

Dude... nobodies with name recognition are literally the worst kind of candidate for Trump to be up against.

Obviously there are big problems with this comparison but consider Jacinda Ardern... no obvious political legacies but well known... replaces the extant party leader partway through the campaign and voila suddenly the entire party feels like a completely different proposition (without actually changing anything). There are candidates like this in the Democratic primary field. The saving grace for Trump could be that possibly the best comparison to Ardern is Beto O'Rourke who appears to have a vastly more sketchy past.

Big Jim thinks that the Democrats will fuck up in the nomination process, something they did in 2016, something they almost did in 2008, something that they did in 2000, and 2004. Democrats mess up more often than not. For instance, I could see Klobuchar winning the swing states, and losing the nomination to someone like Harris, who'll merely win the safe states.

Three points:

• I don't think the existence of primaries is evidence of mature democracy so I don't pay too much attention to them... but what I have seen would suggest that Harris is probably a better candidate than Klobuchar, i.e. what is your logic there?
• the point I'm making is that running a candidate who is effectively a blank slate (e.g. the sort of person who appeals more to safe seats because they lack any kind of personality/qualities which might help in swing seats, which is apparently Harris) is a bigger problem for an unpopular candidate like Trump than a candidate who's got a clear positioning (presumably how you see Klobuchar)
• the key reason for this is that the blank slate can be turned into whatever is best for defeating the unpopular incumbent whilst also offering limited room to be re-positioned by the other side, so I implicitly assume that the candidate's campaign is able to create their first position but the external campaigns can only reframe that... e.g. how you go from "establishment candidate" to "crooked Hillary"... so they're limited in how they can approach a blank slate

In other words, of all the current members of the Democratic field, Bernie Sanders is probably the one with the least shot against Trump.

[Ifreann]

Just in general, or is there something specific I said in that post that you object to?

All of it, but your reparations fetishism in particular.

I just think it's an idea worth exploring.

[Hardholm]

>reparations
>infanticide
>hormone blockers

This is the worst timeline, and literally why I intend to flee into the mountains and be rid of it all lol

[Ifreann]

>reparations
>infanticide
>hormone blockers

This is the worst timeline, and literally why I intend to flee into the mountains and be rid of it all lol

You think you can escape in the mountains? You'll still get wifi.

[Vassenor]

>reparations
>infanticide
>hormone blockers

This is the worst timeline, and literally why I intend to flee into the mountains and be rid of it all lol

What does any of that have to do with the election?

[Hardholm]

>reparations
>infanticide
>hormone blockers

This is the worst timeline, and literally why I intend to flee into the mountains and be rid of it all lol

What does any of that have to do with the election?

Elected leaders have effects on the overall trajectory of national culture and, more immediately, legislation effecting these things and more.

[Port Jefferson]

And just like the Republicans did to Obama.

Please don't feed the false equivalency trolls, the GOP desperately depends on people buying into that "Yeah, we shot their dog in the head and threw it on their porch, but they called our cat ugly, so are they really any better?" bullshit.

Yes, Democrats hated Bush, because just like Trump he took the White House in spite of the Democratic candidate getting more votes..and still they never approached nearly the level of hysterical 'obstruction for the sake of obstruction, we'll filibuster ourselves if we have to, as long as it spites the President!" that was the only coherent GOP policy during the Obama Administration.

Or Clinton for that matter. Have been perpetually amused by all the selective amnesiac conservatives wailing and clutching their pearls about how they never thought they'd see the day America would fall so far that a political party would launch an investigative 'witch hunt' in a desperate attempt to oust a duly elected President with a frivolous impeachment!

The Democrats obstructed under Bush by filibustering conservative judicial appointments. That led to the gang of 14.

The Clinton impeachment was frivolous? He lied under oath affecting Paula Jones right to due process. He lied under oath in regards to the Lewinsky affair. POTUS is supposed to "preserve, protect, and defend the US Constitution". Bill Clinton did not do this.

As punishment, he was fined almost $1 million. His legal licence was suspended in Arkansas and was facing a ban from arguing in front of SCOTUS before resigning from that.

[Tobleste]

Friendly reminder that Americans aren't policy wonks and most of their issues with politicians is tonal and superficial. Of course, the base and the activists within the party need policy to placate them, but so long as Biden can manage to keep his campy uncle vibe going, then he'll be fine.

Of course I have my doubts that he'll actually win the primary, but we'll see.

You do realize that the Reps can counter Biden’s cheery uncle personality with the creepy uncle stereotype, right?

Doubt it would work given Trump would be Biden's opponent. Trump is the creepy uncle but without a soul.

[Yusseria]

All of it, but your reparations fetishism in particular.

I just think it's an idea worth exploring.

I don't, and I doubt a good chunk of the country does either.

[Tobleste]

Just in general, or is there something specific I said in that post that you object to?

All of it, but your reparations fetishism in particular.

I'm shocked someone with your signature would dismiss reparations as stupid. That doesn't confirm to the stereotype at all...

[Yusseria]

All of it, but your reparations fetishism in particular.

I'm shocked someone with your signature would dismiss reparations as stupid. That doesn't confirm to the stereotype at all...

There's a stereotype for people who oppose reparations?

What is it, exactly? Are they stereotyped as sensible people? I could go along with that.

[Tobleste]

I'm shocked someone with your signature would dismiss reparations as stupid. That doesn't confirm to the stereotype at all...

There's a stereotype for people who oppose reparations?

What is it, exactly? Are they stereotyped as sensible people? I could go along with that.

Out of interest, do you own any guns?