Jump to content

Klobuchar surge in New Hampshire could reshuffle Democratic White House race


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It's fine with me if you don't wish to engage further. In fact very fine.

 

But posts aren't read only by you so again, no worries.

 

It now occursto me that Amy did get some good coverage after Iowa and before the New Hampshire debate, and that can easily be explained by these points instead of resorting to conspiracy theory sounding rhetoric that somehow the invisible powers that be were doing a hit job or Yang and were propping up Amy.

 

-- Amy did much better in the Iowa caucuses than Yang. Poorer performing candidates generally get less media attention.

 

Amy got about 13 percent of the popular vote and only one delegate.

 

Yang got about 5 percent of the popular vote and no delegates.

 

-- Amy used her political skills realizing that the results weren't coming in on time in Iowa to hold the FIRST candidate speaking event after the election. It was very upbeat. It wasn't silly to say she had won as she knew she hadn't, but it allowed her to spin Iowa in a positive way for her. Surely we want a democratic nominee that has such good political skills and instincts! Being

first to do that, she got good attention from the media. No dark conspiracy to screw Yang.

 

 

I don't respond very well to insults. Saying that you will talk to me against your better judgment is an insult. It that is the case better you save your breath.  

 

Edited by sirineou
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

She's been my top choice all along. She performs beautifully in the senate so has credible experience. She has strong African American support in her state. She wins bigly in precincts in her state th

Laughable given what you defend in the current incumbent.

Posted Images

25 minutes ago, sucit said:

Both parties are already "identified with socialism". In fact, they crave the attention it bring, using social security as an example. Support for it us favorable. Don't support it and numbers drop. 

 

Get over this sentiment that "socialism is bad" please. We are not 12 years old any longer. 

 

Let's just assume for argument's sake for a second that Bernie's health care plan gets implemented. 

 

Can you please tell me who on earth is going to be complaining, besides the health insurance and drug companies? What segment of the population is going to go to the hospital in an emergency, receive absolutely no bill, and come out of it all saying "<deleted> socialism". 

 

You are using buzz words but you are not actually explaining why Klobuchar's policies are better. How is the average person going to the hospital going to be better off under Klobuchar's establishment health care plan going to benefit people? 

I've already addressed all of your points before so I won't be responding to the very same material again. I particularly don't enjoy your repeated and obviously totally false insults attributing red baiting to me when I've told you numerous times the concern is about how the 45 campaign would definitely exploit the label that Sanders gave himself. It worked for Sanders as a senator from very blue "almost Canada" Vermont but as far as running for president, it's a deal breaker own goal.

 

If you want to approach this in a different way than you have as in the repetitive post above, be my guest. Otherwise, please don't bother me with the same false attacks that I've already answered.

 

Cheers.

Edited by Jingthing
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I've already addressed all of your points before so I won't be responding to the very same material again. I particularly don't enjoy your repeated and obviously totally false insults attributing red baiting to me when I've told you numerous times the concern is about how the 45 campaign would definitely exploit the label that Sanders gave himself. It worked for Sanders as a senator from very blue "almost Canada" Vermont but as far as running for president, it's a deal breaker own goal.

 

If you want to approach this in a different way than you have as in the repetitive post above, be my guest. Otherwise, please don't bother me with the same false attacks that I've already answered.

 

Cheers.

How would Trump exploit that, if Bernie just states about health care what I did in the post above? And, don't you think Bernie, being a veteran in these debates, will be able to answer 100 times as eloquently as me? 

 

If I was Bernie, I would not be able to wait to address Trump when he says "socialism". Every time he does it, that gives you a chance to say...

 

"Healthcare without bills, you get to see the best doctors in the world, and not pay a dime". 

 

"Higher education for all Americans, not just the well off". 

 

"A livable working wage". 

 

It gives Bernie a springboard to speak about topics that are extremely popular with the public.

 

I never saw you address why you think Klobuchar can win when Hilary... a more well funded, establishment centrist lost. I also never saw you show me polls where Klobuchar significantly outscores Bernie against Trump in a general election.

 

What you do consistently is just make up, out of thin air... "Bernie can't win". Show me something. You do not get to just say this stuff, you need to actually show why you believe that to be taken seriously. 

 

Your posts come off as almost 100% disingenuous. You seem more concerned with labels than you do with actual policies. If it is your position to support "winning labels", that is fine, but just come out and say that: that is, "I support candidates I think can win, I do not even care about their policies". 

Edited by sucit
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

You make these media assertions as well and victimization claims towards Yang and I seriously doubt you can back them up.

It is not that difficult to figure this stuff out. Unless you only watch CNN and Rachel Maddow of course. 

 

Yang was omitted from so many graphics it is impossible to track the number. His speaking time in debates vs polling numbers were so glaringly obvious, even your obviously beloved establishment media reported on it a few times. 

 

This is all fact. Verifiable facts. When graphics get omitted or are in error on a network once or twice for example, we can of course chalk that up to a mistake.

 

When graphics are in error and a candidate is omitted over a dozen times, you can't arrive at that same conclusion, especially when the news organizations have an obvious history of biased coverage against non-establishment candidates. Klobuchar is establishment by the way. 

 

I honestly do not even expect "normal" people like you to pick up on things like the obvious media biases against candidates like Yang. You watch the news, and it never dawns on you what is happening. Most people are like this, and that is the problem. That does not make it untrue though. Just look through the errors, omissions and lack of speaking time yourself. I know you wont do it because you don't care, and that is part of the point. I suppose just feel lucky that you have been duped into an establishment candidate, because she wont get any sort of media blackout, but she also wont make any real changes if she did in fact happen to win. That is how it works, establishment candidates keep the status quo. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sucit said:

It is not that difficult to figure this stuff out. Unless you only watch CNN and Rachel Maddow of course. 

 

Yang was omitted from so many graphics it is impossible to track the number. His speaking time in debates vs polling numbers were so glaringly obvious, even your obviously beloved establishment media reported on it a few times. 

 

This is all fact. Verifiable facts. When graphics get omitted or are in error on a network once or twice for example, we can of course chalk that up to a mistake.

 

When graphics are in error and a candidate is omitted over a dozen times, you can't arrive at that same conclusion, especially when the news organizations have an obvious history of biased coverage against non-establishment candidates. Klobuchar is establishment by the way. 

 

I honestly do not even expect "normal" people like you to pick up on things like the obvious media biases against candidates like Yang. You watch the news, and it never dawns on you what is happening. Most people are like this, and that is the problem. That does not make it untrue though. Just look through the errors, omissions and lack of speaking time yourself. I know you wont do it because you don't care, and that is part of the point. I suppose just feel lucky that you have been duped into an establishment candidate, because she wont get any sort of media blackout, but she also wont make any real changes if she did in fact happen to win. That is how it works, establishment candidates keep the status quo. 

You forgot to mention sheeple. 

 

Bye. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminder.

 

It wasn't far left democrats that provided the blue wave takeover victory in the house in 18.

 

It was more centrist ones. 

 

Also looking at the primaries so far when you add the votes of Bernie and Warren and compare to the more centrist remainder the more centrist composite is way ahead. 

 

Bernie may indeed be nominated because the opposition is spread too thin but that would not really be representative of what most democrats want. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/were-witnessing-the-reemergence-of-the-moderate-democrat/2020/02/13/ffdab50e-4e9f-11ea-9b5c-eac5b16dafaa_story.html


 

Quote

 

We’re witnessing the reemergence of the moderate Democrat

 

For all the thunder on the Bernie Sanders left, the most interesting trend in the Democratic campaign this year may be the reemergence of the moderate wing of the party, led by charismatic new voices: former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar.

 

In our barbell view of politics, where all the weight seems to be at the two ends, this reality may be obscured: Far more Americans (42 percent) described themselves as independents than as Democrats (27 percent) or Republicans (30 percent) in the most recent Gallup survey of party affiliation. The percentage of people who see themselves in this broad middle has rarely been higher.

 

 

 

Edited by Jingthing
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Berkshire said:

I like Bernie, always have.  He's an honest, decent man and would be infinitely a better President than Trump.  But the socialism thing, you seriously underestimate the GOP machine's ability to spin that, as well as the average intelligence of the voting public.  Bernie may be saying socialism in the sense of Norway or Sweden, but the GOP will tie it to Venezuela and every shthole banana republic out there.  And people will believe it. 

 

If Bernie becomes the Democratic candidate, of course I'll support him.  But it's risky.

How old are you though? I would bet money you are over 50. 

 

You guys are just saying stuff, as i mentioned, and not backing it up. Why isn't it you who us "underestimating" Tump's ability to beat a woman, centrist, establishment democrat? It just happened! You see the difference between your assertions and mine? There is an actual recent comparison to support the fact that a candidate like this may not fare very well. Actual hard facts. Where is the "Bernie will fail in a general with Trump" data? From all accounts, it looks very good according to polling.

 

Point, you do not get to just say stuff. Especially when the facts indicate otherwise. 

 

So, I think it is you who are underestimating. I bet if I would have asked you 10 years ago if a "democratic socialist" could be the favorite dem candidate, you would call me crazy. But that is what is happening, because it is not as easy to pull wool over voter eyes any longer because there are more sources for news than just the mainstream media. 

 

Again, I can even see hardcore conservative types listening to some of this stuff in the debate, and saying, "man, i can take my kids to the hospital, and they will be able to get an education too" while they polish their gun racks. 

 

The list goes on and on with that kind of thing, because his policies are better AND more popular, and he isn't bought. 

 

All this stuff is going to come up in the debates. Idk why people think Trump is some kind of world class debater. He may be good at rallying from twitter, but he was never very convincing in my opinion, UNLESS he was talking about positions which put him in office such as bringing a stop to the wars, which a candidate like Bernie will actually do. 

 

So yeah, I do sorta hear what you are saying, but people do not have only one choice for news any longer. They get it from the internet, much of it is very good, and they actually know what is going on. 

 

I can put the same question to you as i asked earlier? Name me a person on earth who thinks about going to the hospital and not getting a bill, who is not in favor of it. The only argument they have is "how can we pay for it" lol. That is how you know they are gonna lose in the debates, it is all they cling to, yet meanwhile they fund unnecessary wars and inject money to prop up wall street on a daily basis.

Edited by sucit
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

You forgot to mention sheeple. 

 

Bye. 

Honestly, I do not even need to remember anything because it is so obvious you are clinging to this candidate for the sole reason that she will have the best chance to beat Trump.

 

But, you fail to realize a woman, establishment dem just lost to Trump, and you are not admitting that this spells disaster, all at your own peril. You also fail to realize many young voters didn't grow up sucking their thumbs watching the Cuban missile crisis. That BS propaganda just is not as effective any longer. Yet further, you fail to acknowledge the key is voter turnout, and who has the most energy and enthusiasm behind their campaign currently. Who is most able to get young voter to come out? If you think that is Klobuchar you are seriously out of touch. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Also looking at the primaries so far when you add the votes of Bernie and Warren and compare to the more centrist remainder the more centrist composite is way ahead. 

I am sorry but I just cannot stop laughing at this lol

 

"If we somehow fuse two or three of our candidate's votes together, we maybe would have a chance to beat Bernie" lol lol

 

Do you even see how horrendously biased that is? It is such a reach. 

 

Get this through your head: Sanders won because he is the most popular. People who are the most popular will always be the winner, because that is how the elections work. Bernie beat NINE other candidates. You do not get to pick and choose candidates and add their votes together to beat other candidates lol. 

 

This comment seriously is making me want to change my signature. I am just lazy but I think you have got mongodave beaten by a long shot. 

 

Do yourself a favor, stop reading corporate news. Elections do not work by adding votes from multiple candidates to find "composites". If they did, candidates would campaign much differently. Use your brain! 

Edited by sucit
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

Geez man, you are naive beyond belief.  So tell me, how do you think Trump got elected in 2016?  Hint: It had nothing to do with his debating skills.  Or facts, policies, ideas,...nothing like that.  Look, we're on the same team...I think.  I want Trump out, I don't care who does it. 

Exactly. This election certainly will not be about specific policy wonkery. It's about direction. The USA as authoritarian country like Russia/Hungary/Turkey OR working our way back out of the dark abyss that 45 has sunk us into. To obsess about policy details or some fiction of ideological purity now is like someone in a house fire not bothering to evacuate but instead logging onto Amazon to change the cup size of their jock strap order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...