Biden seems to always come out ahead of Trump in head to head general election polls so far. Sanders often does (though with less of a margin than Biden does), and the other candidates come out behind or too close for comfort. But I worry about how much of this is just name recognition, and whether with all the bots and progressives bashing Biden constantly, they're going to accomplish what Nichols fears -- i.e., kill our most viable candidate without making Warren or Sanders the president (thereby accomplishing Putin's goal and not the progressives' goal).
Last Edit: Jun 22, 2019 13:03:59 GMT -5 by Deleted
You don't. It's up to the candidates, not you. And it's certainly not up to the hordes of assholes--left, right, whatever--on social media.
It's not that I'm unwilling to listen to your points of view--or those of other reasonable people--on candidates, on issues, etc. I am. And it's possible that these things may alter my own points of view. This has certainly been the case in the past.
But there is absolutely nothing you can say that's going to cause me to go "yeah, I'm voting Dem no matter what," because in my view that's an awful approach to voting and I will never be going down that road. It's every bit as awful as going to vote, not knowing beans about candidates in a race, and just voting for the one with an R or a D by their name.
Yes, there is something I can do, in theory. It's to support a candidate you can stomach, thereby increasing the chances that candidate will win the nomination. The nominee doesn't appear magically. It's the result of a lot of people working, giving money, convincing, and voting during the primary. I'm one of those people. And as a Democrat and a donor, I'm being hit with ten million polls asking me what I think the candidates should focus on. I answer those polls. I've been thinking about volunteering to work with a campaign, maybe hold events. And, well, I know some influential people, and some people with money. I may be able to convince them to go in particular directions. Yeah, there's something I can do to move that needle in a particular direction. I can't decide who gets the nomination, but I can certainly help.
Lots of these candidates have been in the public eye for many, many years -- their platforms are out there and so are their backgrounds. Not Buttigieg, maybe, but Sanders, Biden, Harris, Warren, Booker -- they've all been out there for years. Maybe yuuuuge things could happen that would put them in a completely new light, but I'm guessing not. Lift a sheet and kick a tire, and I think what you see now is what you'll get.
I'm not asked you to say "yeah, I'm voting Dem no matter what." That's my take and Nichols on what WE'RE going to do -- but I'm not asking you to do it. I've several times said I'm not asking you to do it. That's you being defensive. I've merely explained why I'M doing it.
I'm the one offering to base MY primary vote on what YOU like, because I can pretty much live with most of them and I'm pretty confident y'all can't. I'm asking you if we've got anything that might appeal to you or utterly turn you off. Getting a sense of why is helpful, too -- is it Warren's/Biden's/whoever's policies that turn you on/off, or just their personalities. This is like me asking what pizza toppings you prefer because I eat everything but know you hate anchovies and are allergic to mushrooms, and I'm hoping to ultimately convince you to have a piece of pizza.
The GOP nomination is a done deal, unfortunately. I'd love to think Weld or someone has a shot, but they don't. The Dem nomination is another story. It's far from a done deal. If independents want to influence it, I think they can. Sure seems better than waiting for the primaries and complaining, but what do I know. If you like Trump, it's maybe not worth it. But if you don't -- well, maybe you can help us pick someone tolerable.
In 2016 we picked Hillary. Dems liked her. Too many independents didn't. I'd rather not do that again, if we can avoid it, so I'm seeking information now, early, before we get to 2020Hillary versus 2020Trump.
I must note that you are always -- quite correctly -- telling people that they should vote downstream in smaller elections, and not just in big ones every four years. I heartily agree. But I think a similar analogy applies here. Maybe you don't want to register and vote Dem to help pick our primary candidate, but ya know, thinking about candidates you can live with or hell, actually like and talking about it could move that needle to general election choices that suck less. Again, lots of us are eager to pick a candidate that might pull in independents. You all forming some opinions and telling your Dem neighbors just might move them to a candidate you're okay with. At least THIS year, when a lot of us just want Trump out more than anything. Just saying.
What interests me, by the way, is that I've found it easier to pull views out of NeverTrump Republicans on these points than out of independent voters. (Biden seems to be the overall consensus among them, and a couple are determined to vote Dem no matter what, unless perhaps it is Gabbard or Sanders.) I don't know if that's a fluke among my own circle, or if they as a group just don't find it as difficult to answer the question as third party voters do.
Anyway. I may need to throw my hands up here and go with my gut, the polls, and the NT R's of my acquaintance. I'm backing Biden. You know why. Feel free to convince me how wrong I am, and why it would be better for me to support someone else.
Last Edit: Jun 22, 2019 14:24:46 GMT -5 by Deleted
Another reason I'm interested in hearing about WHY a particular candidate doesn't appeal is to think about whether it's (a) something that is just "welp, that's the democratic platform, there, and we're not going to win you in any event, (b) something that is very specific about that candidate that is not going to change, ever, but wouldn't apply to another candidate, or (c) something that is perhaps a piece of misinformation or distortion about a candidate or the Democratic platform that is floating out there. There's a lot of it out there, some of it deliberately circulated. (Like, that the Democratic platform allows killing babies after they are born or would simply open the borders or would form death panels to decide who lives and dies among the sick. That's...actually not true. Truly, it isn't.)
I actually understood in 2016 that though some of the attacks on Hillary were IMO not fair or accurate, it was also the case that many independents didn't like her for deep-seated reasons that would not change, period, and they would NEVER vote for her. And though I thought some of the attacks were her were exaggerated and unfair, some of them had a basis. Sue me, fellow Democrats. The thing I underestimated was that so many people would go for Trump, because given everything I knew about him, that just seemed impossible. I was wrong.
Anyway, I'd just like to avoid 2016 if I can. That means getting a good grip on (b) issues in particular, and perhaps, to the extent I can, disprove any (c) issues. My guess is that Warren has (b) issues and is Hillary II for independents, whatever her merits among Democrats. But hey, I might be wrong. Maybe that's Biden. If so, why not show me why? Unless maybe you really DO want 4 more years of Trump, of course, and a reason not to vote for a Democrat.
I've done a quick scan of this thread between homework assignments. (Who the hell talked me into going back into college?)
Biden: He's a loud mouth. He's saner than Trump, but in many ways, I see him like Trump. I've always felt this way. He just comes across to me as an asshole who can't see anything except that he's right. His remarks about how the GOP will put blacks back into chains is an example. I can't recall each and every detail at this time, but there's just something about him I don't trust or like.
Harris: My issue with her is her past as a prosecutor, I've heard things that makes me think she took joy in locking people up without caring if they were innocent, or maybe didn't deserve it. However, what I've heard may not have been properly vetted yet, so my mind is open.
In truth, I'm looking for someone on the D side to vote for cause Trump is off the table. However, I'm a NY'er. So I know my individual vote won't go to Trump. I could vote for him and I know it won't matter, but I simply refuse. Should he get a serious challenger, I might hope for that person in the general, but I'm registered as an Independent.
I utterly and strongly disagree with prozyan, but I can see the point.
I'll vote for anyone (Libertarian, Green, Independent, independent) other than either of the two main party candidates, no matter who they are, and no matter if it causes one mainstream candidate to "win by one vote" over the other.
Third party and independent candidates need to be a much larger percentage of the Presidential vote if voting for President is to mean much, and I am doing my part to make this happen. Yes, even this year.* There are three hundred million or so people in this country, but come election day it's always between exactly TWO "viable" candidates. Why is this?
* I totally abhor sentence fragments, but I'm starting to use them sarcastically or even "as commonly used in 21st Century English" to make my point.
Last Edit: Jun 23, 2019 22:04:35 GMT -5 by ben: Just piling on even more of my humble opinion
An opinion: the only way a third party is going to take off is if a candidate runs under its banner that truly captures a significant portion of the population's interest. Even then, it will only take off if he or she wins or comes close, and other good candidates soon thereafter follow in that candidate's footsteps and run under that banner.
It's never, ever going to happen because a handful of protest voters make a point of voting libertarian or green. Never. Convince someone awesome and tempting to lots of people to run under that banner, and maybe you've got a start.
So. While I can see voting third party because you genuinely like that candidate best, I don't honestly think voting third party regardless of which candidates you like for the sake of starting a movement gets you squat.
I think there's a decent shot that, e.g., the GOP collapses and a new conservative party takes its place, but that's just a substitution of a party for another, not a third party.
For what it's worth, though, I do think a non-flaky third party could be a good thing, if one could get off the ground. I just think it's going to take a very charismatic candidate to accomplish that.
I'm not going to give you vitriol, Prozyan, but I admit I really don't get people who don't vote. My take is basically "if you don't vote and you could, you've forfeited your right to bitch about the way things are." Unless maybe you're very active in community movements or something that help change things. Even then, I don't get not taking a few minutes to vote. But, like I said, I haven't skipped an election since I was 18, however piddling and even when I wasn't crazy about anyone. There is always a candidate who is preferable, even if I don't love him/her. So that's my bias. And as you can see, I'm out there thinking about it long before elections take place, even (maybe especially, actually) for local elections.
I can't help but feel the country would be in better shape if more thoughtful , intelligent people did the same. Just saying.
Johnson /Weld should have flipped the ticket, and worked harder, And though they never would have won, they might have done better. I actually rather like them both, but Johnson never seemed like he took running all that seriously, and he flubbed some stuff Weld would have handled better. Flipped and with more effort, I think there was some shot that ticket could have gained more traction than it did. Also, running under the Libertarian party banner.. .Well, the Libertaria n Party has too many kooks and it's too easy to scoff them off. A new party banner would have been better, I think. I'm still not sure they could have topped 10%, but they might have done better.
Evan McMullin is a good man and I respect him. But he wasn't going to get lots of support--he's just not well known enough. He wasn't going to succeed in launching a third party.
Jill Stein is the bride of Putin. She should go to Russia where she belongs and stay there.
The last 3rd party candidate I thought had (at least for a while) a shot at creating a new third party was Ross Perot. He had money and a weird charisma. He might even have had a shot if winning if he hadn't ultimately shown he was a weird motherfucker.
Had Trump run as a third party candidate, he would not have won (he needed establishment Dems and evangelicals--if he'd been third party, they would have stayed with Kasich or Rubio or whoever was the GOP candidate), but he would have gotten a big chunk of the vote. Hillary would have won in that event.
Same for Sanders. He has a loyal base, so he's get a good chunk. But he wouldn't win. He'd throw the election to the Republicans.
A third party that had legs and a shot of winning would be centrist and appeal to center left and center right. If Trump gallops away with the GOP and the Dems go in way left rather than with center left (I doubt they will do that in 2020), perhaps one will emerge. But not in 2020.