| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6796
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/09/20 5:10 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
But is anyone really voting for the top of the ticket
I haven't heard anyone say, Biden is awesome, I am so stoked about his plans for health care, taxes, climate change, his foreign policy, he is so smart and really represents my values and I am super energized to vote for Joe Biden!
At least no one I know.
People are voting for Biden because they liked the Obama years and when they did the math right or wrong they felt Biden had the best chance to beat Trump.
That is not a resounding endorsement for the candidate it is a quiet resignation to the idea that anyone would be better than Trump.
If there is a fervent Biden fan out there I would love to hear what besides nostalgia and calculation excites you about Biden.
Because for myself tbh I will be more energized by who he picks as the VP candidate than I will be by the top of the ticket, but of course I will vote blue no matter who is the VP as I am now voting blue despite the fact that I think Biden was the worst possible choice for my heart even if I can grasp why many think he is the best choice based on their minds.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 5:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| I will vote blue no matter who is the VP |
Hence, the running mate does not matter
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6796
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 5:23 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| I will vote blue no matter who is the VP |
Hence, the running mate does not matter |
Yes, but by the same token neither does the actual candidate.
unless the actual argument is Biden will bring the "all votes to the yard", despite the fact that no one is actually excited by Biden's candidacy.
which is a weird position to be in so why not try and choose an exciting VP.
Clearly Biden think he needs a woman VP because women and young people would be the most energized by that and that is where he sees his weakness demographically so it must matter some or why state that?
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 5:37 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| But is anyone really voting for the top of the ticket. |
Hahaha. I mean, hahaha. Exactly. Yeah BIDEN!!! Woo-hoo!
 _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 5:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| I will vote blue no matter who is the VP |
Hence, the running mate does not matter |
Yes, but by the same token neither does the actual candidate. |
Nonsense. If Tulsi Gabbard was the nominee you'd be talking about how great Howie Hawkins is.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
taropatch
Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 814
Location: Kau Rubbish Dump
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 5:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Here's an idea. After naming the woman of his choice to fill the ticket, Declining Joe should name his candidates for cabinet if he wins. Sanders as Sec of State, Yang as Sec of Housing, etc will provide some excitement and inclusiveness for our divided electorate. Some of you know better than I who would be best for each position but you get the idea.
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6796
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 6:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| I will vote blue no matter who is the VP |
Hence, the running mate does not matter |
Yes, but by the same token neither does the actual candidate. |
Nonsense. If Tulsi Gabbard was the nominee you'd be talking about how great Howie Hawkins is. |
I mean the current top of the ticket not the farcical 1% candidate
Also even though you are responding to a specific point you are selectively quoting my posts to make your argument
for instance if the VP doesn't matter why would the current candidate insist he is selecting a woman?
Or if people are voting for Biden what besides nostalgia and risk calculation as the best candidate to beat Trump are they excited about?
If VP doesn't matter and this top of the ticket candidate does? Why?
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9606
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 6:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| When a candidate is 77 and there is a lot of talk that he has declined mentally I think there is a good chance a VP would matter. I agree that if he picked his cabinet, and they all accepted, that could get some Democrats fired up. But it seems that out of 20+ candidates for president the one quality most important for the nomination was that you were Barack Obama’s Vice President. And that didn’t even require an endorsement. Biden’s nomination shoots down the notion that “in this period of time the Democrats will never choose a white male”.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 6:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| J-Spoon wrote: |
Or if people are voting for Biden what besides nostalgia and risk calculation as the best candidate to beat Trump are they excited about? |
Wait a minute. Let me think. OH SHIT! Former VP.  _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 6:59 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Wow . . . I'll vote for Party X no matter who the presidential candidate is, no matter who the vice presidential candidate is, no matter how old they are, no matter what their health situations are, no matter what their experience is, and no matter what their policies are on any issue at all!
This confirms the wisdom of the Founders in rejecting a popular vote for the presidency, and instead instituting a state-controlled electoral college, to protect the republic, as they said, against unthinking knee-jerk and bloc voting by the masses.
As to Warren as VP risking the Senate, that is the same risk as it was for Warren as POTUS. |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 7:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| This confirms the wisdom of the Founders in rejecting a popular vote for the presidency, and instead instituting a state-controlled electoral college, to protect the republic, as they said, against unthinking knee-jerk and bloc voting by the masses. |
Too bad it no longer serves that purpose, as all 50 states have legally mandated that their electors vote for whoever wins the popular vote in that state.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
J-Spoon
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 6796
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 7:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
Wow . . . I'll vote for Party X no matter who the presidential candidate is, no matter who the vice presidential candidate is, no matter how old they are, no matter what their health situations are, no matter what their experience is, and no matter what their policies are on any issue at all!
This confirms the wisdom of the Founders in rejecting a popular vote for the presidency, and instead instituting a state-controlled electoral college, to protect the republic, as they said, against unthinking knee-jerk and bloc voting by the masses.
As to Warren as VP risking the Senate, that is the same risk as it was for Warren as POTUS. |
Obviously the situation is circumstantial
Yes, in this case with this current President a vast majority of democrats will vote for any blue candidate that runs against him.
And his success in 2016 to a certain extent worked the same way as some republicans would have voted for anyone who wasn't Hillary Clinton.
OTOH in my lifetime Republican Presidential candidates have won 6 elections and Democratic Presidential candidates have won 5 so clearly there is give and take in the way many Americans vote that goes beyond party identity.
Also MA is weird for a blue state they often have Republican Governors but rarely have Republican Senators so I wouldn't worry about Warrens replacement too much.
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9606
Back to top |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 7:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| This confirms the wisdom of the Founders in rejecting a popular vote for the presidency, and instead instituting a state-controlled electoral college, to protect the republic, as they said, against unthinking knee-jerk and bloc voting by the masses. |
Too bad it no longer serves that purpose, as all 50 states have legally mandated that their electors vote for whoever wins the popular vote in that state. |
Yes, but that's still not a direct popular vote for the presidency, and the electoral college still serves the purpose of blunting the knee-jerk masses in homogenized populous states from always being able to outvote the more diverse knee-jerk masses in less populous states. It's also only my ancillary point. |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 7:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| This confirms the wisdom of the Founders in rejecting a popular vote for the presidency, and instead instituting a state-controlled electoral college, to protect the republic, as they said, against unthinking knee-jerk and bloc voting by the masses. |
Too bad it no longer serves that purpose, as all 50 states have legally mandated that their electors vote for whoever wins the popular vote in that state. |
Yes, but that's still not a direct popular vote for the presidency, and the electoral college still serves the purpose of blunting the knee-jerk masses in homogenized populous states from always being able to outvote the more diverse knee-jerk masses in less populous states. It's also only my ancillary point. |
Yes, we all got your main point: Thank goodness this archaic system exists so that my side has a chance of winning.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 7:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| J-Spoon wrote: |
in this case with this current President a vast majority of democrats will vote for any blue candidate that runs against him.
|
I understand the general sense of what you mean, but the actual arithmetic of party voting is more pliable and ambiguous than that. I mean, what is a Democrat these days? Bernie has never been a Democrat.
Does Democrat = socialist now, yes or no? I don't think there's a clear answer.
What are "swing voters", "independents", "Reagan Democrats", the "silent majority", "middle America", the "forgotten blue collar worker"? What party are they?
I think Trump will get lots of votes other than his almost equally hard-to-define "base".
It's really hard for me to think a less qualified or more dangerous candidate to lead the world and hold the nuclear codes than a person in serious old-age mental decline. I wouldn't care it it was one of the giants on Mt. Rushmore. Too old and senile is disqualifying. Never has this country had a presidential candidate as weak and fragile as 2020 Joe Biden.
And even when Biden was young and vital, his own party overwhelmingly recognized him to be a terrible presidential candidate, twice, and very literally an end-of-bench joke. Many close political observers in both parties agree with Robert Gates, who was the Secretary of Defense in Democrat and Republican administrations, the Director of the CIA and the Deputy National Security advisor among many other positions, who said in his memoir that Joe Biden "has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades."
Biden's been a wrong, but kissy, huggy, smiley glad-hander, on a lot more than foreign policy and national security since 1972, and probably can't remember much of it now. |
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21927
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/20 9:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
Never has this country had a presidential candidate as weak and fragile as 2020 Joe Biden.
--
And even when Biden was young and vital, his own party overwhelmingly recognized him to be a terrible presidential candidate, twice, and very literally an end-of-bench joke.
--
Biden's been a wrong, but kissy, huggy, smiley glad-hander, on a lot more than foreign policy and national security since 1972 |
Imagine how bad an incumbent would have to be to lose to a guy like that ^
It's probably not humanly possible to be that amount of bad.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5356
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/10/20 9:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I think one of the more disturbing possibilities of a second term for #45 is the potential appointment of another SCOTUS justice. An even more conservative court bodes well only for the very well-heeled few. Protections and safeguards in place for years maybe dismantled, and so forth and so on. |
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9606
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/10/20 11:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
A recent Quinnipiac shows this for people 18 to 34:
View unfavorably
Trump 57%
Biden 49%
View favorably
Trump 33%
Biden 30%
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9606
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/14/20 10:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Both Sanders and Obama have now endorsed Biden.
|
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 11188
Back to top |
|
TechDawgMc
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 401
Location: Temple, TX
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/15/20 12:07 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| J-Spoon wrote: |
| I will vote blue no matter who is the VP |
Hence, the running mate does not matter |
Ah, but you need to think about what the whole electorate will do. I would not vote FOR Donald Trump under any circumstances. I would, however, likely vote AGAINST Elizabeth Warren (and I didn't even vote for Trump against Hillary). If the Dems push someone on the left, they will get a lot of centrists to vote against them.
As others have mentioned, I don't think Biden can finish a term. I'm not even sure he's capable of actually running a real campaign. Voting for Biden is voting for his running mate. And I'm not voting for a leftist.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/15/20 12:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| The whole electorate cares even less about running mates than the people paying close attention do. Running mates do not affect the outcomes of presidential elections.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
TechDawgMc
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 401
Location: Temple, TX
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/15/20 2:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| The whole electorate cares even less about running mates than the people paying close attention do. Running mates do not affect the outcomes of presidential elections. |
I have never made any kind of election decision based on the VP, that's true. This year could change that. That's also true.
If Biden is the candidate, a lot of people are going to notice that he acts and sounds like their parent/grandparent/aunt/uncle who had dementia. That's going to be a hard sale. Even as bad as Trump is -- and the possibility that he's starting to sound a little odd himself (but how can you tell?) -- that might make a difference.
|
|
Genero36
Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 11188
Back to top |
|
|
|
