Political Roundtable Part XXVII

[bsilver]

And, the next president will be Amy Klobuchar. Why?
Current national polls:
Biden - 29%
Sanders - 23%
Warren - 15%
Bloomberg - 7
Buttigig - 7%

There is absolutely no reason to think anyone will have a majority entering the convention.

The progressive votes maxes out at 38% (23+15), but not all Warren supporters are progressives. Many just want to support a woman. I'd put the progressive vote at about 33%. The rest of D's are moderate and/or put winning as top priority so won't switch to Sanders or Warren. Neither Sanders or Warren have a chance at the nomination.
and
Buttigig is a shooting star and will flame out after Iowa. His votes going to other moderates. Also, many just want to win don't see a gay small city mayor as a viable candidate against Trump.

Bloomberg and Steyer are basically buying votes with their massive advertising. Most don't want to be seen as a billionaire buying the D nomination. Their voters will go to another moderate.

I like Yang but he has 0% chance. Maybe he'd be a good VP candidate. His votes go to av moderate.

That leaves Biden and Klobuchar. Biden is hated by the progressives. Very few switch to Biden.
There's a good reason many moderate alternatives are getting support. Many want an alternative to Biden. His negatives are many.

As a compromise Klobuchar gets the nomination. There's too much negative emotions/reason against Biden or a progressive to think they'll win the nomination so there has to be an alternative.

National polls are almost meaningless because of the way the primaries are setup. Not everyone votes at the same time. For example if Bernie wins New Hampshire and Iowa he’s certain to have momentum for South Carolina and other states. Same thing goes for other candidates where you could have different candidates win in the first four states.

The national polls are meaningful once you get past the first several primary states. The next primaries come fast and candidates can't put the resources in like the 1st four states. I know that each state is separate, but after the initial primaries, national polls will become a better barometer.

The results of all the democratic primaries award a proportional number of delegates to the winners, with a threshold of 15% of the vote needed to get delegates. With a quick start in Iowa/NH Sanders may only get 30-35% of the delegates even winning these states.

Now, it looks like Biden and Sanders are the favorites to get the nomination but I do not believe either will have more than 50% of the delegates required. If either one is real close, some may feel obligated to select that person, but it's way to early to predict that. For either to get 50% the other contenders would have to drop out. Some will and some won't. Bloomberg, with almost unlimited resources probably will not.

Another factor is the superdelegates which are 15% of the total. With the new rules adopted in 2018, they will not vote in the first ballot. In subsequent rounds they will be a big factor. Since they are the "establishment" it's unlikely they will want Sanders.

There's bad blood now between Biden and Sanders and it may be even worse by the convention. Their supporters will be reluctant to support the other candidate. I don't see many supporting Trump, but they may sit out or vote 3rd party. Due to these hard feelings, and no candidate having a majority, I see a good chance of a compromise candidate being selected at the convention. It may be Klobuchar or Warren. They seem most likely to me.

[Pointgod]

Joe Rogan’s been pointed out as problematic way before the Bernie endorsement. It’s been pointed out that he gives a platform to white supremacists, misogynists, conspiracy theorists, which is independent of the stuff that he’s said. It may not matter to you, but it’s dismissive to say that there aren’t legitimate concerns with Rogan. A lot of people that have taken issue with Rogan are the core of the Democratic Party. It’s not wrong to think that Bernie touting his endorsement is igniring concerns of people in his own party

Where I find this most interesting (not really, but at least more than anywhere else) is the hilarious double-standard it exposes. My experience with Bernie supporters involved a lot of them trying to discredit Andrew Yang because he was drawing so much support from meathead Joe Rogan fans after going on one of his podcasts and that they didn't trust his policies given where his support was coming from. Fast-forward to present day and they've collectively completely changed their tune and forgotten about every having a problem with it.

I'm not sure what difference this will really make, to be honest. The idea of trying to move forward while ignoring a large section of voters is a rather difficult one, though. I'm not sure how many people will change their mind because of what Rogan specifically says. He hasn't exactly been a movement starter in that respect, just a megaphone for all sorts of ideas, many of them terrible ideas. Can he start a movement for Bernie in sections of the population that hadn't moved that direction thus far? We will see, I suppose.

And this is the a huge problem people have with Bernie supporters. The cult of personality built around the man is insane to where they’d rationalize all of Bernie’s significant missteps. They’ve deluded themselves to the point where they don’t understand that he has massive red flags outside of the left bubble. It’s very similar to the Labour Party in the UK. It’s okay to criticize Bernie when it’s warranted and still fully support him. It’s not a binary choice.

As for Joe Rogan this was pretty much an unforced error from Bernie’s camp. He literally should have addressed that Joe Rogan has said some things that affect the core Democratic base, but he’ll never stop fighting for them. If there are policies that Joe Rogan and his fans agree with, he welcomes the support but his focus is on helping the most marginalized in society. I agree with you I don’t think Joe Rogan moves the needle at all. I think in general celebrity endorsements don’t do much or else Taylor Swift’s endorsement in Tennessee would have lessened the blood bath in that state during the midterms.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

I expect there will be threats made from the Republican mafia inside the Senate to their members if they decide to make it public that they want Bolton to testify.

Listen you can always count on Republicans to do the absolute wrong thing when it comes down to party over anything else. If anyone needs a reminder, just google Brett Kavanaugh.

[montestewart]

I mean Republicans are pretty happy to implement the Nazi agenda so it’s reasonable to shriek over that. Bernie is not transphobic and his agenda has zero to do with anything like that. It’s absurd to think Bernie is transphobic because of Joe Rogan or he hates women because of something Warren said he said

I follow Joe Rogan, and I can't reconcile the idea that he's transphobic or racist with what I've heard from him over the years.

He is fairly outspoken against the idea of transgender athletes and I do count myself among those that thinks the idea of inclusiveness is problematic in certain edge cases.

Even if you listen to the podcast about planet of the apes he is sharing some insights from a white perspective that resonated with me as a black man and brings up some points about lack of diversity in Hollywood and the effects it must have on black communities.

This is entirely agenda driven bull.

Decontextualized sound bites from Rogan to discredit Bernie Sanders is straight from the neocon **** throwing playbook.

It's a manufactured controversy by centrist media. These are the same people who celebrated Clinton going on Howard Stern, who's a borderline sexist/racist and long time friend of Trump.

Leading up to Obama's election, the same media impulse sought out racist white voters who had decided to vote for Obama despite his blackness. Sensationalism aside, winning over at least some people whose ideas you abhor can be a critical part of winning an election. Obama was able to do it. Trump was apparently able to do it last time. Had Clinton won a little better with a small segment (was it 70,000 across three states?). Win their votes and start to change their minds.

I have never listened to Joe Rogan podcasts, but I recall him from before podcast fame and he seemed similar to Stern, sometimes pretty funny, sometimes nonchalantly offensive. Maybe Sanders shouldn't wrap himself in a Rogan endorsement, but if he's smart he will find a way to keep it.

[pancakes3]

it's also not a manufactured controversy by the centrist media; in fact the opposite. Rogan's podcast isn't MSM, and neither is Bernie's retweet. it's purely an example where engaged voters who saw it happen in real time in front of them independent of the media and having a discussion.

[closg00]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

I will be shocked if Bolton testifies, the political out will be that the Trumps defense wraps-up, then they will acknowledge that votes don't exist for a conviction therefore they will end it without witnesses.

[Pointgod]

And, the next president will be Amy Klobuchar. Why?
Current national polls:
Biden - 29%
Sanders - 23%
Warren - 15%
Bloomberg - 7
Buttigig - 7%

There is absolutely no reason to think anyone will have a majority entering the convention.

The progressive votes maxes out at 38% (23+15), but not all Warren supporters are progressives. Many just want to support a woman. I'd put the progressive vote at about 33%. The rest of D's are moderate and/or put winning as top priority so won't switch to Sanders or Warren. Neither Sanders or Warren have a chance at the nomination.
and
Buttigig is a shooting star and will flame out after Iowa. His votes going to other moderates. Also, many just want to win don't see a gay small city mayor as a viable candidate against Trump.

Bloomberg and Steyer are basically buying votes with their massive advertising. Most don't want to be seen as a billionaire buying the D nomination. Their voters will go to another moderate.

I like Yang but he has 0% chance. Maybe he'd be a good VP candidate. His votes go to av moderate.

That leaves Biden and Klobuchar. Biden is hated by the progressives. Very few switch to Biden.
There's a good reason many moderate alternatives are getting support. Many want an alternative to Biden. His negatives are many.

As a compromise Klobuchar gets the nomination. There's too much negative emotions/reason against Biden or a progressive to think they'll win the nomination so there has to be an alternative.

National polls are almost meaningless because of the way the primaries are setup. Not everyone votes at the same time. For example if Bernie wins New Hampshire and Iowa he’s certain to have momentum for South Carolina and other states. Same thing goes for other candidates where you could have different candidates win in the first four states.

The national polls are meaningful once you get past the first several primary states. The next primaries come fast and candidates can't put the resources in like the 1st four states. I know that each state is separate, but after the initial primaries, national polls will become a better barometer.

The results of all the democratic primaries award a proportional number of delegates to the winners, with a threshold of 15% of the vote needed to get delegates. With a quick start in Iowa/NH Sanders may only get 30-35% of the delegates even winning these states.

Now, it looks like Biden and Sanders are the favorites to get the nomination but I do not believe either will have more than 50% of the delegates required. If either one is real close, some may feel obligated to select that person, but it's way to early to predict that. For either to get 50% the other contenders would have to drop out. Some will and some won't. Bloomberg, with almost unlimited resources probably will not.

Another factor is the superdelegates which are 15% of the total. With the new rules adopted in 2018, they will not vote in the first ballot. In subsequent rounds they will be a big factor. Since they are the "establishment" it's unlikely they will want Sanders.

There's bad blood now between Biden and Sanders and it may be even worse by the convention. Their supporters will be reluctant to support the other candidate. I don't see many supporting Trump, but they may sit out or vote 3rd party. Due to these hard feelings, and no candidate having a majority, I see a good chance of a compromise candidate being selected at the convention. It may be Klobuchar or Warren. They seem most likely to me.

Genuine question. What were the polls saying before Iowa and New Hampshire in 2008 and 2004? From everything I’ve heard both Obama and Kerry game out of nowhere to win Iowa and the momentum carried them. I might be remembering it incorrectly but the polls shift based on momentum.

Mathematically, you’re 100% right about the delegates and super delegates. A brokered convention is a likely outcome which would lead to even more insanity within the Democratic Party. I think Warren should be the leading candidate by the way but that’s another story.

[bsilver]

National polls are almost meaningless because of the way the primaries are setup. Not everyone votes at the same time. For example if Bernie wins New Hampshire and Iowa he’s certain to have momentum for South Carolina and other states. Same thing goes for other candidates where you could have different candidates win in the first four states.

The national polls are meaningful once you get past the first several primary states. The next primaries come fast and candidates can't put the resources in like the 1st four states. I know that each state is separate, but after the initial primaries, national polls will become a better barometer.

The results of all the democratic primaries award a proportional number of delegates to the winners, with a threshold of 15% of the vote needed to get delegates. With a quick start in Iowa/NH Sanders may only get 30-35% of the delegates even winning these states.

Now, it looks like Biden and Sanders are the favorites to get the nomination but I do not believe either will have more than 50% of the delegates required. If either one is real close, some may feel obligated to select that person, but it's way to early to predict that. For either to get 50% the other contenders would have to drop out. Some will and some won't. Bloomberg, with almost unlimited resources probably will not.

Another factor is the superdelegates which are 15% of the total. With the new rules adopted in 2018, they will not vote in the first ballot. In subsequent rounds they will be a big factor. Since they are the "establishment" it's unlikely they will want Sanders.

There's bad blood now between Biden and Sanders and it may be even worse by the convention. Their supporters will be reluctant to support the other candidate. I don't see many supporting Trump, but they may sit out or vote 3rd party. Due to these hard feelings, and no candidate having a majority, I see a good chance of a compromise candidate being selected at the convention. It may be Klobuchar or Warren. They seem most likely to me.

Genuine question. What were the polls saying before Iowa and New Hampshire in 2008 and 2004? From everything I’ve heard both Obama and Kerry game out of nowhere to win Iowa and the momentum carried them. I might be remembering it incorrectly but the polls shift based on momentum.

Mathematically, you’re 100% right about the delegates and super delegates. A brokered convention is a likely outcome which would lead to even more insanity within the Democratic Party. I think Warren should be the leading candidate by the way but that’s another story.

You're correct about 2004 and 2008. Neither Kerry or Obama were favorites, and were relatively unknown nationally. A similar result this year would be if a Buttigig/Yang/Klobuchar type did unexpectedly well. I don't think a Sanders victory would be similar. He's a very known quantity. A victory may give him momentum vs Warren since they're competing for the same vote (albeit with lots exceptions). I don't think his victory helps make inroads with the moderate voters.

It will be interesting to see what happens if Warren gets less than 15% of the vote and walk away with no delegates. If her campaign falters will her supporters go to Sanders or elsewhere. If Sanders is the only progressive left we'll start to see if his support gets anywhere near 50%. If it stays below 40% I don't see him getting the nomination.

[Pointgod]

The national polls are meaningful once you get past the first several primary states. The next primaries come fast and candidates can't put the resources in like the 1st four states. I know that each state is separate, but after the initial primaries, national polls will become a better barometer.

The results of all the democratic primaries award a proportional number of delegates to the winners, with a threshold of 15% of the vote needed to get delegates. With a quick start in Iowa/NH Sanders may only get 30-35% of the delegates even winning these states.

Now, it looks like Biden and Sanders are the favorites to get the nomination but I do not believe either will have more than 50% of the delegates required. If either one is real close, some may feel obligated to select that person, but it's way to early to predict that. For either to get 50% the other contenders would have to drop out. Some will and some won't. Bloomberg, with almost unlimited resources probably will not.

Another factor is the superdelegates which are 15% of the total. With the new rules adopted in 2018, they will not vote in the first ballot. In subsequent rounds they will be a big factor. Since they are the "establishment" it's unlikely they will want Sanders.

There's bad blood now between Biden and Sanders and it may be even worse by the convention. Their supporters will be reluctant to support the other candidate. I don't see many supporting Trump, but they may sit out or vote 3rd party. Due to these hard feelings, and no candidate having a majority, I see a good chance of a compromise candidate being selected at the convention. It may be Klobuchar or Warren. They seem most likely to me.

Genuine question. What were the polls saying before Iowa and New Hampshire in 2008 and 2004? From everything I’ve heard both Obama and Kerry game out of nowhere to win Iowa and the momentum carried them. I might be remembering it incorrectly but the polls shift based on momentum.

Mathematically, you’re 100% right about the delegates and super delegates. A brokered convention is a likely outcome which would lead to even more insanity within the Democratic Party. I think Warren should be the leading candidate by the way but that’s another story.

You're correct about 2004 and 2008. Neither Kerry or Obama were favorites, and were relatively unknown nationally. A similar result this year would be if a Buttigig/Yang/Klobuchar type did unexpectedly well. I don't think a Sanders victory would be similar. He's a very known quantity. A victory may give him momentum vs Warren since they're competing for the same vote (albeit with lots exceptions). I don't think his victory helps make inroads with the moderate voters.

It will be interesting to see what happens if Warren gets less than 15% of the vote and walk away with no delegates. If her campaign falters will her supporters go to Sanders or elsewhere. If Sanders is the only progressive left we'll start to see if his support gets anywhere near 50%. If it stays below 40% I don't see him getting the nomination.

My point about 2008 and 2004 is not that they’ll be another Obama or Kerry but polls are kind of useless except to capture a moment in time. Pollsters poll likely voters, I think it’s a lot harder to poll new voters or reengaged voters. People also lie about who they like and who they’ll end up voting for. I follow a lot of podcasts and journalists that really dig deep into the primary and from what I hear Bernie has the strongest campaign on the ground and they’re turning out new voters. So he could even run away with this thing even higher than projections. His ceiling on the Progressive side is around 35%, and that’s if he takes all of Warren’s votes. He has to pull some moderate votes to break 50 and from what I hear he’s also a second choice for a lot of Biden voters. But literally no one knows how things shake out. Biden’s support is still there. Does Mayor Pete or Warren make a late run? Polls only tell us so much.

[Zonkerbl]

Trump winning the nomination forced the "mainstream" Republicans to concede power to the radical right wing of their party, they held their noses and voted for Trump and won themselves a two year one party dictatorship. That worked out better than they could have possibly hoped. Trump got his base riled up and out of their seats and into the voting booth.

I'm not a huge Bernie fan but honestly a Bernie win would 1) penalize all the plutocrats who raided the government coffers for the two years the GOP was running amok with no oversight 2) teach the Dems to pay attention to their progressive "base" (instead of being purple Republicans like Biden is) although a candidate that represented African Americans would accomplish that better than Bernie I think. Also if a big Bernie surge gets his followers off their keisters and out to the voting booth they might help us win the Senate. I'd support Tulsi Gabbard if it meant winning the senate.

[queridiculo]

Dershowitz must really be bored with his life to burn it all down as a final act.

It's either that, he's trolling, or he is no longer in the possession of his full mental faculties.

His arguments are so nonsensical that I am curious as to why he isn't excoriated publicly for his obvious hackery.

As part of his defense of Trump he conjures up obvious lies (Obama sending Iran money without approval from congress) and imagines powers the POTUS holds that would make the constitutional fathers faint.

He is claiming that he's not representing Trump and is simply along for the ride as a constitutional scholar, yet all of his arguments seem to whither down to defenses that vindicate Trumps conduct, not actual serious arguments about why his behavior doesn't rise to impeachable conduct according to the constitution.

What a bizarre set of interpretations by Dershowitz considering that he's demonstrably wrong about things as basic as the constitutional limits to the exercise of power.

[Pointgod]

Trump winning the nomination forced the "mainstream" Republicans to concede power to the radical right wing of their party, they held their noses and voted for Trump and won themselves a two year one party dictatorship. That worked out better than they could have possibly hoped. Trump got his base riled up and out of their seats and into the voting booth.

I'm not a huge Bernie fan but honestly a Bernie win would 1) penalize all the plutocrats who raided the government coffers for the two years the GOP was running amok with no oversight 2) teach the Dems to pay attention to their progressive "base" (instead of being purple Republicans like Biden is) although a candidate that represented African Americans would accomplish that better than Bernie I think. Also if a big Bernie surge gets his followers off their keisters and out to the voting booth they might help us win the Senate. I'd support Tulsi Gabbard if it meant winning the senate.

thank God we’ll never have to find out.

You can’t compare Trump grabbing the GOP by the pussy to the anyone on the left. The right wing is a bunch of morally bankrupt grifters who don’t care about racism and want tax cuts and loud and proud racists who want tax cuts. There’s little distinction between the right. It’s why Trump can at the same time say government is corrupt, yet funnel money from the government to his gold clubs while still supported by the same morons that voted him in to fight corruption. Long as Trump cuts taxes, appoints unqualified right wing judges and remains openly racist Republicans will fall in line.

I’ve mentioned this before but I’ve been listening to some podcasts that speak with Democratic primary voters. Happy to recommend them, but I don’t think enough people realize there are huge blind spots with Bernie. The man is an uncompromising ideologue and has not managed to rebrand his policies away from socialism. For example, when a supporter who worked for an insurance company asked him about job loss with Medicare for all he told her that yes people will lose their jobs. That’s it. I get that Medicare long term Medicare for all is better long term than the current system, but I don’t know how the hell he’ll convince non hardcore Bernie supporters to vote for him when his basic pitch is your taxes will go up and if you work in healthcare you’ll most likely lose your job. I have no idea why she’s fallen, Elizabeth Warren is better messenger for Bernie’s policies than Bernie. You get 95% of what Bernie is offering, but someone willing to get rid of the filibuster, appoint a committee to investigate Trump’s corruption and will lay out a plan to get things done. I think she could better speak to the non Progressives who don’t want to burn it all down.

[Pointgod]

Dershowitz must really be bored with his life to burn it all down as a final act.

It's either that, he's trolling, or he is no longer in the possession of his full mental faculties.

His arguments are so nonsensical that I am curious as to why he isn't excoriated publicly for his obvious hackery.

As part of his defense of Trump he conjures up obvious lies (Obama sending Iran money without approval from congress) and imagines powers the POTUS holds that would make the constitutional fathers faint.

He is claiming that he's not representing Trump and is simply along for the ride as a constitutional scholar, yet all of his arguments seem to whither down to defenses that vindicate Trumps conduct, not actual serious arguments about why his behavior doesn't rise to impeachable conduct according to the constitution.

What a bizarre set of interpretations by Dershowitz considering that he's demonstrably wrong about things as basic as the constitutional limits to the exercise of power.

Two words Jeffrey Epstein.

[Kanyewest]

Trump winning the nomination forced the "mainstream" Republicans to concede power to the radical right wing of their party, they held their noses and voted for Trump and won themselves a two year one party dictatorship. That worked out better than they could have possibly hoped. Trump got his base riled up and out of their seats and into the voting booth.

I'm not a huge Bernie fan but honestly a Bernie win would 1) penalize all the plutocrats who raided the government coffers for the two years the GOP was running amok with no oversight 2) teach the Dems to pay attention to their progressive "base" (instead of being purple Republicans like Biden is) although a candidate that represented African Americans would accomplish that better than Bernie I think. Also if a big Bernie surge gets his followers off their keisters and out to the voting booth they might help us win the Senate. I'd support Tulsi Gabbard if it meant winning the senate.

thank God we’ll never have to find out.

You can’t compare Trump grabbing the GOP by the pussy to the anyone on the left. The right wing is a bunch of morally bankrupt grifters who don’t care about racism and want tax cuts and loud and proud racists who want tax cuts. There’s little distinction between the right. It’s why Trump can at the same time say government is corrupt, yet funnel money from the government to his gold clubs while still supported by the same morons that voted him in to fight corruption. Long as Trump cuts taxes, appoints unqualified right wing judges and remains openly racist Republicans will fall in line.

I’ve mentioned this before but I’ve been listening to some podcasts that speak with Democratic primary voters. Happy to recommend them, but I don’t think enough people realize there are huge blind spots with Bernie. The man is an uncompromising ideologue and has not managed to rebrand his policies away from socialism. For example, when a supporter who worked for an insurance company asked him about job loss with Medicare for all he told her that yes people will lose their jobs. That’s it. I get that Medicare long term Medicare for all is better long term than the current system, but I don’t know how the hell he’ll convince non hardcore Bernie supporters to vote for him when his basic pitch is your taxes will go up and if you work in healthcare you’ll most likely lose your job. I have no idea why she’s fallen, Elizabeth Warren is better messenger for Bernie’s policies than Bernie. You get 95% of what Bernie is offering, but someone willing to get rid of the filibuster, appoint a committee to investigate Trump’s corruption and will lay out a plan to get things done. I think she could better speak to the non Progressives who don’t want to burn it all down.

I can't pin down one reason why Elizabeth Warren has fallen (and as you stated before who knows if the polls are accurate) but I can speculate why she has.

- Warren's surge came from strong debate performances against poor ones mediocre candidates like John Delaney and a slew of others. Candidates like Biden also struggled. This coincided with Sanders health issues (a sore throat debate performance as well as a heart attack). Now I think several Sanders supporter switched to Warren during this time frame especially when pundits on MSNBC/CNN stated that Warren was more electable.

- That being said, Sanders support still stayed within striking distance. He has the most passionate supporters out of all the candidates, while many dislike him, those that like him, like Sanders a lot. I think it reminds me of fans of a sports team that often drive the narrative such as LA. One can't also discount the fact Sanders has much higher name recognition than Warren especially for those who are not following the debates closely given that he was a candidate in 2016. Not to mention a few weeks after his heart attack, Bernie Sanders received the endorsement of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez which help shed the label of Bernie Sanders as being too white (in fact I believe CNN/MSNBC now criticized Sanders as being "too urban")

- Back to Warren, once she became in the top 2, she started to receive attacks on not only the progressive side but also publications like the Washington Post (columnist like Jennifer Rubin which Democratic relatives have forwarded me that basically attack Warren as too liberal).

- In the next time frame, Warren was no longer the surging candidate and attempted to appear more moderate perhaps in an attempt to attract Harris's supporters as well as Mayor Pete and Amy Kloubacher. She stated that medicare for all would only be addressed in the 3rd year of her term. While this may be a good strategy for a general election, in a democratic primary, a majority of voters prefer medicare for all over the status quo. This allowed Sanders an opening to gain even more of her supporters which he may have previously lost and at the same time didn't seem to budge any moderate voters.

- Overall, Warren's debate performances no longer seemed as impressive especially as the field improved. Even Biden's debate performances improved enough. Warren's wine cave debate with Mayor Pete probably hurt both candidates- especially since it seemed hyperbolic since she she had received big money donation from her previous senatorial campaign which she was using for her presidential run. Sanders in the meantime may have peeled off some supporters.

- Again one can't underestimate the base of support that Sanders established in 2016. He has people more likely to volunteer for him, give money to him. I also think the result of him having more passionate supporters is a double edge sword, they can be toxic but they can attract voters who are undecided on who to vote for.

- Warren's attack on Sanders prior to the last debate appears to come up flat (Sanders doesn't think a female president could win). I think Warren's attempt to subtly imply Sanders is sexist hasn't done much to convince any non Sanders/Warren supporters I know to support her. At the same time, campaign supporters like Michael Moore made a podcast about "The downfall of Elizabeth Warren" (https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/michael-moore-4/rumble-with-michael-moore/e/66581238).

- Warren also shifted to a more moderate position of supporting the new trade deal while Sanders was against it. Pod Save America cited that even Democrats back in 2008 voted against trade deals because they believed that the Democrats would write better legislation (I even think Biden implied this in his debate answer but would have to double check). This would appear to help Sanders a lot more with Iowa voters who may be anti-trade.

- The last debate was also the one that did not feature Andrew Yang. Some polling in late 2019 suggested that Yang was actually the candidate of choice for young males (18-22) than Bernie Sanders- perhaps some of that support shifted to Sanders. Although now Yang stronger polling has qualified him for the New Hampshire debate.

- Finally Hillary Clinton attacking Sanders may have helped Sanders more than anything. I don't think people who were already supporting Sanders were going to switch.

But who knows what is going to happen. I am interested to see how accurate the polls are in regards to the actual elections.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[Ruzious]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Lol, both Rudy and Lev at the trial? Even if they don't testify, Republican Senators will be peeing their pants. Oh that's right - none of them have ever met Lev.

[pancakes3]

i think most americans know what a fair trial looks like, and this ain't it.

like, could you imagine an episode of law and order where you've got witnesses beating down the door to testify and the jurors are openly saying to the press "i said it before and i'll say it again, dude was innocent from the jump and there's no changing my mind."

[TGW]

Trump winning the nomination forced the "mainstream" Republicans to concede power to the radical right wing of their party, they held their noses and voted for Trump and won themselves a two year one party dictatorship. That worked out better than they could have possibly hoped. Trump got his base riled up and out of their seats and into the voting booth.

I'm not a huge Bernie fan but honestly a Bernie win would 1) penalize all the plutocrats who raided the government coffers for the two years the GOP was running amok with no oversight 2) teach the Dems to pay attention to their progressive "base" (instead of being purple Republicans like Biden is) although a candidate that represented African Americans would accomplish that better than Bernie I think. Also if a big Bernie surge gets his followers off their keisters and out to the voting booth they might help us win the Senate. I'd support Tulsi Gabbard if it meant winning the senate.

Come out of the shackles of moderate bondage and come to the left, Zonker.



And a newsflash: Bernie does represent African Americans. He's winning the black vote in my demographic (AA's under 50), and outside of reparations, has the best policies to help AA's. He's also vetting Barbara Lee--a progressive favorite and beloved in the AA community--for VP if he wins.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[dobrojim]

Lol, both Rudy and Lev at the trial? Even if they don't testify, Republican Senators will be peeing their pants. Oh that's right - none of them have ever met Lev.

Watch on YouTube