2020 US General Election Thread IV: The Battle Begins

[USS Monitor]

And though I've given a more theoretical answer than is perhaps called for, I'll respond by saying this: What Republicans ill basically do is say to people that Sanders will take away their savings and their income if they get too successful; that he'll limit how well they can live and how big their dreams can be. That may not resonate much with the working class, but it will give urban professionals cause to hesitate before voting for Sanders. They can even boil this down to an easy slogan: "Sanders will kill the American Dream."

And that's the problem, in a nutshell. If pushed, I suspect Sanders can't and won't tell people that he's willing to let the get as rich as they want, but that instead, they have to accept that there's a limit on what they can have, based on the idea that there's such a thing as "enough".

I don't know, man. He does a pretty good job of connecting what they're making to what your making. While there has been a thread of 'being a billionaire is fucking ridiculous' it's always been tied to things like Bezo or the Waltons are billionaires while they don't pay their employees enough to live without assistance and they avoid taxes that you or I could never hope to.

The whole 'resist the class war' line has been used since Reagan times but the groove is starting to wear out. People are noticing that the class war has been raging for a while but from the other side. This has been their playbook for a while but it has diminishing returns.

Also, it doesn't matter who the Democrats nominate, Trump and co. will fill the airwaves with disingenuous attacks. Trying to pick your candidate based on immunity to Trump being a fucking toolbox is a lost cause. We could write these missives about everyone in the Democratic primary. They could nominate Melania and he'd still come up with a rash of bullshit to throw at her.

The trick isn't giving in to the Trump in your head before the ballots are even cast, it's knowing that disinformation is going to be the tool regardless of who it is and find ways to counter it.

Sure, everyone that votes for Melania is just doing it because she's a woman and they are sexist against men. Also, trying to subvert the Constitution by voting for someone that is not eligible because she's an immigrant.

[San Lumen]

To bring this back to the election if you want to know how toxic republicans and especially Trump
are in metro areas look no further than this: https://apnews.com/f00cd7a026eab1c8a9f4d4c474f95ece

Westchester county’s last Republican legislator David Tubiolo has switched parties meaning but a single republican will be serving on the county legislature giving them 16 seats out of 17 in this county located north of NYC. He announced he will not be voting Republican in November. One seat is held by a member of the Conservative party. This can’t be a good sign for Republicans as just a few short years ago republicans held the the county executive and a majority of seats.

[Galloism]

The funny thing is that would likely lead to the next thing about laws - unless they're signed by a permissible president, or an override vote is passed by congress, it's not actually a law.

So any law passed during this illegal third term and signed by the president would be void for being an unconstitutional law, as it had never been presented to the president in accordance with Article 1, Section 7 of the constitution (lacking an eligible president to present it TO). This would essentially make the laws "static" and unchangeable, as we could not complete the process to ever pass any new ones.

Every law "passed" after the 3rd term would be struck down by the courts. Without exception.

If the law is neither signed nor vetoed it becomes law after ten days (excluding Sundays) so long as congress is in session (if congress adjourns the bill dies in whats called the pocket veto).

Again, that presumes the law is presented to the president, which cannot happen.

Article 1, section 7, says:

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States;

How will they accomplish this with no president?

[Zurkerx]

I didn't know this but I figured I post this: my representative from NJ, Andy Kim, endorsed Buttigieg. I mean, it's not that big but I figured I post it. Also, surprisingly, my dad is convinced Buttigieg and Bloomberg has a shot to beat Trump though he rather see Sanders or Warren be the nominee, but only because it would guarantee Trump's victory, and he wants to see the Dems appear radical and out of touch.

[Gormwood]

Sanders will win NH but if it's under 5 points, that's not a good sign for him. However, if it's over 10 points, he should be fine in my opinion. Between 5-10 would generally be good for him. I surmise he'll be in the 5-10 point range.



This is the clearest sign yet she may drop out: her numbers aren't looking good in NH and if she has a distant third and or comes under 15%, she's done. She'll suspend her campaign and endorse Bernie. I suspect a moderate will do so too to give a moderate candidate (like Butigieg) a chance.

And what if he loses.

It's like you want Sanders to lose so you can whine "I TOLD YOU SO!" to everyone.

[New Rogernomics]

Whoever wins the nomination, I am going to abstain on the Presidential election rather than vote for any of the candidates, and vote for the state reps and Congress instead.

Thanks to a really poor showing and barely any policy but "impeach Trump" and vague promises over healthcare, there is likely going to be a major reshuffle of the House, and maybe even the Democrats lose it.

If some folks want to go vote for a candidate who is going to lose and just be involved for the sake of it, they are welcome to. Though we aren't through the primaries, and they [the DNC] have made such a mess of Iowa that it seems like Democrats will be too divided and dysfunctional to unite behind one candidate, let alone build a strong enough campaign to beat Trump.

[Cannot think of a name]

Whoever wins the nomination, I am going to abstain on the Presidential election rather than vote for any of the candidates, and vote for the state reps and Congress instead.

Thanks to a really poor showing and barely any policy but "impeach Trump" and vague promises over healthcare, there is likely going to be a major reshuffle of the House, and maybe even the Democrats lose it.

If some folks want to go vote for a candidate who is going to lose and just be involved for the sake of it, they are welcome to. Though we aren't through the primaries, and they [the DNC] have made such a mess of Iowa that it seems like Democrats will be too divided and dysfunctional to unite behind one candidate, let alone build a strong enough campaign to beat Trump.

Life in goldfish world.

[Genivaria]

I honestly wish that we would adopt a degree of direct democracy, I feel like that would avoid the problem of people forming cults around candidates.
At least on local issues maybe.

[Farnhamia]

Whoever wins the nomination, I am going to abstain on the Presidential election rather than vote for any of the candidates, and vote for the state reps and Congress instead.

Thanks to a really poor showing and barely any policy but "impeach Trump" and vague promises over healthcare, there is likely going to be a major reshuffle of the House, and maybe even the Democrats lose it.

If some folks want to go vote for a candidate who is going to lose and just be involved for the sake of it, they are welcome to. Though we aren't through the primaries, and they [the DNC] have made such a mess of Iowa that it seems like Democrats will be too divided and dysfunctional to unite behind one candidate, let alone build a strong enough campaign to beat Trump.

Life in goldfish world.

I like my bowl, it's got the treasure chest thing that opens and closes, opens and closes.

[B o r o v a n]

To bring this back to the election if you want to know how toxic republicans and especially Trump
are in metro areas look no further than this: https://apnews.com/f00cd7a026eab1c8a9f4d4c474f95ece

Westchester county’s last Republican legislator David Tubiolo has switched parties meaning but a single republican will be serving on the county legislature giving them 16 seats out of 17 in this county located north of NYC. He announced he will not be voting Republican in November. One seat is held by a member of the Conservative party. This can’t be a good sign for Republicans as just a few short years ago republicans held the the county executive and a majority of seats.

Rockefeller republicans are virtually extinct. The modern GOP doesn't fit them. They used to be a faction in the mid 1900s in the northeast but they've disappeared.

[San Lumen]

Whoever wins the nomination, I am going to abstain on the Presidential election rather than vote for any of the candidates, and vote for the state reps and Congress instead.

Thanks to a really poor showing and barely any policy but "impeach Trump" and vague promises over healthcare, there is likely going to be a major reshuffle of the House, and maybe even the Democrats lose it.

If some folks want to go vote for a candidate who is going to lose and just be involved for the sake of it, they are welcome to. Though we aren't through the primaries, and they [the DNC] have made such a mess of Iowa that it seems like Democrats will be too divided and dysfunctional to unite behind one candidate, let alone build a strong enough campaign to beat Trump.

Not voting is a vote for Trump. Losing the house is doubtful unless the Democrat loses in a landslide

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Whoever wins the nomination, I am going to abstain on the Presidential election rather than vote for any of the candidates, and vote for the state reps and Congress instead.

Thanks to a really poor showing and barely any policy but "impeach Trump" and vague promises over healthcare, there is likely going to be a major reshuffle of the House, and maybe even the Democrats lose it.

If some folks want to go vote for a candidate who is going to lose and just be involved for the sake of it, they are welcome to. Though we aren't through the primaries, and they [the DNC] have made such a mess of Iowa that it seems like Democrats will be too divided and dysfunctional to unite behind one candidate, let alone build a strong enough campaign to beat Trump.

I understand if you’re fed up about how things are flowing right now. I understand if you think voting at this junction is a waste of your time. However, if you have the ability and right to vote, exercise it. It’s this way of thinking that costs elections to candidates that could probably enact change. It’s a defeatist position.

But you do you, I guess.

[Shrillland]

Although I've been under the weather, the march of initiatives grinds on with another proposition from California.

California: After Prop 10's failure in 2018, its creators are trying again to reform Costa-Hawkins, California's rent control law. Instead of repealing it outright, they now plan to change the operative date on when a property can have rent controls imposed. Instead of only allowing it if it was occupied before February 1, 1995, this would allow it if it was occupied over 15 years from the present day, effectively allowing more rent controls as time progresses. There would be exemptions on people who own no more than two homes with distinct titles. It would also end vacancy decontrol practices by requiring landlords to limit rent increases to 15% for the first three years following a vacancy.

[San Lumen]

To bring this back to the election if you want to know how toxic republicans and especially Trump
are in metro areas look no further than this: https://apnews.com/f00cd7a026eab1c8a9f4d4c474f95ece

Westchester county’s last Republican legislator David Tubiolo has switched parties meaning but a single republican will be serving on the county legislature giving them 16 seats out of 17 in this county located north of NYC. He announced he will not be voting Republican in November. One seat is held by a member of the Conservative party. This can’t be a good sign for Republicans as just a few short years ago republicans held the the county executive and a majority of seats.

Rockefeller republicans are virtually extinct. The modern GOP doesn't fit them. They used to be a faction in the mid 1900s in the northeast but they've disappeared.

Yes very true. Look at the Governors of Vermont and New Hampshire both up for reelection this year. Both are quite liberal and might as well be Democrat's.

Governor Scott of Vermont criticized Trump recently and said he should have been removed from office. I expect him to get a primary challenge from a Trump loyalist. If he loses that challenge they can kiss the governorship goodbye.

[Bear Stearns]

To bring this back to the election if you want to know how toxic republicans and especially Trump
are in metro areas look no further than this: https://apnews.com/f00cd7a026eab1c8a9f4d4c474f95ece

Westchester county’s last Republican legislator David Tubiolo has switched parties meaning but a single republican will be serving on the county legislature giving them 16 seats out of 17 in this county located north of NYC. He announced he will not be voting Republican in November. One seat is held by a member of the Conservative party. This can’t be a good sign for Republicans as just a few short years ago republicans held the the county executive and a majority of seats.

Rockefeller republicans are virtually extinct. The modern GOP doesn't fit them. They used to be a faction in the mid 1900s in the northeast but they've disappeared.

They went extinct because they had nothing to offer that was really different from what moderate Democrats were saying and they were also seen as out of touch, rich weirdos (which they sort of were). It's not some great travesty that they're gone. They were never important to begin with.

I mean their own name implies that they're a bunch of blue-blood 1%er assholes.

[Gormwood]

Life in goldfish world.

I like my bowl, it's got the treasure chest thing that opens and closes, opens and closes.

So what's it like being a cheese cracker?

[Sundiata]

At this moment, Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are my preferred candidates for the presidency.

[New Rogernomics]

Whoever wins the nomination, I am going to abstain on the Presidential election rather than vote for any of the candidates, and vote for the state reps and Congress instead.

Thanks to a really poor showing and barely any policy but "impeach Trump" and vague promises over healthcare, there is likely going to be a major reshuffle of the House, and maybe even the Democrats lose it.

If some folks want to go vote for a candidate who is going to lose and just be involved for the sake of it, they are welcome to. Though we aren't through the primaries, and they [the DNC] have made such a mess of Iowa that it seems like Democrats will be too divided and dysfunctional to unite behind one candidate, let alone build a strong enough campaign to beat Trump.

Life in goldfish world.

Goldfish actually make decent pets unlike the primary front-runners, and none of that has bearing on what will happen, which multiple news sources such as politico are already pointing out is going to likely be a Trump victory.

[San Lumen]

Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are my preferred candidates for the presidency.

I prefer Pete over Bernie. I think he's more electable

[Gormwood]

Life in goldfish world.

Goldfish actually make decent pets unlike the primary front-runners, and none of that has bearing on what will happen, which multiple news sources such as politico are already pointing out is going to likely be a Trump victory.

President Hillary Clinton says hi.

[San Lumen]

Life in goldfish world.

Goldfish actually make decent pets unlike the primary front-runners, and none of that has bearing on what will happen, which multiple news sources such as politico are already pointing out is going to likely be a Trump victory.

Governor Andrew Gillum says hello

[Gormwood]

Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are my preferred candidates for the presidency.

I prefer Pete over Bernie. I think he's more electable

"Electability" is codeword for "S/He doesn't look like a cunt to me."

[San Lumen]

I prefer Pete over Bernie. I think he's more electable

"Electability" is codeword for "S/He doesn't look like a cunt to me."

Im sorry?

[Sundiata]

Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are my preferred candidates for the presidency.

I prefer Pete over Bernie. I think he's more electable

I think Pete is less electable than Bernie Sanders because Pete is a moderate with the appearance of corruption: billionaire donors, wine caves, missing South Bend police tapes. However, I do believe he's the most competent nominee because he's a military veteran and Rhodes scholar.

[Genivaria]

Pete Buttigieg and Bernie Sanders are my preferred candidates for the presidency.

I prefer Pete over Bernie. I think he's more electable

You're just objectively wrong, more non-leftists will vote for Sanders then Buttigieg statistically.