RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Rebkell’s Official Democratic Primary Ballot
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Which ticket is your choice for POTUS and VP for the Democratic nomination?
Joe Biden (P) Stacey Abrams (VP)
64%
 64%  [ 16 ]
Bernie Sanders (P) Elizabeth Warren (VP)
36%
 36%  [ 9 ]
Total Votes : 25

Author Message
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20140



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/05/20 2:51 pm    ::: Rebkell’s Official Democratic Primary Ballot Reply Reply with quote

Please choose one.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
sambista



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16810
Location: way station of life


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/05/20 3:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

i guess warren was right. there are only two lanes.



_________________
no justice, no peace.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20140



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/20 11:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Turnout is rather light. Confused



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
Luuuc



Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 20016



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/06/20 11:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
Turnout is rather light. Confused

Which is rather indicative of how psyched the average voter is about making that selection?



_________________
Is there gas in the car?
Yes there's gas in the car.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20140



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/20 12:00 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Luuuc wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Turnout is rather light. Confused

Which is rather indicative of how psyched the average voter is about making that selection?


Point taken.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7726



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/20 12:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I wonder if Warren and Sanders are on good enough terms that she would be his VP. Who is plan B?

But being a Sanders VP does have more allure than normal - he would be 79 on inauguration day. This data

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2010/022.pdf

is over a decade old, but the remaining life expectancy for a white male who was 75 in 2007 was 10.6 years. Going by that Sanders would not be expected to make it to the end of a second term.


toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 21076



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/20 6:32 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I just don't see Sanders picking Warren. I mean, the two of them went at each other during the debates pretty hard.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12715
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/20 2:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Luuuc wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Turnout is rather light. Confused

Which is rather indicative of how psyched the average voter is about making that selection?


Obvious enough, unfortunately.

BUTTT....All True Democrats will put hearts and minds, bodies and souls into the NECESSARY Turnout in November. Cool

(right....? Shocked )



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 6141
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/20 4:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Luuuc wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Turnout is rather light. Confused

Which is rather indicative of how psyched the average voter is about making that selection?


Unfortunately, I thinks it's more indicative of the dwindling life support that this entire site has been on for years.
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20140



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/07/20 8:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Luuuc wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
Turnout is rather light. Confused

Which is rather indicative of how psyched the average voter is about making that selection?


Unfortunately, I thinks it's more indicative of the dwindling life support that this entire site has been on for years.


On the women's basketball side?



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 764
Location: Seattle, WA


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/20 1:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

In this scenario, I picked Sanders + Warren in a heartbeat (Warren was my favorite candidate). In real life, I also think that's the only way Sanders wins the primary - by having Warren as his VP. Still, Biden picking nearly any female politician of color to be his running mate would certainly be a savvy move of his own, let alone the nationally-recognized Abrams - and it's much more likely to happen at this point than Sanders picking Warren imo.


Hawkeye



Joined: 10 Aug 2010
Posts: 601
Location: Houston, TX


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/20 5:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'd rather have Biden-Buttigieg. Abrams feels like a flash in the pan right now--and she lost and will be bashed for that by Trumpsters everyday and twice in Sunday.

Biden should win this thing and I would like to see Warren as Secretary of Education and Yang possibly in commerce.

I just don't see Sanders beating Trump---although a misnomer, the whole socialist tag and forcing people off their current insurance (even if M4A is better and cheaper) isn't going to play well with many.

We shall see--next primaries are Tuesday!


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 15101
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/08/20 5:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hawkeye wrote:
I'd rather have Biden-Buttigieg. Abrams feels like a flash in the pan right now--and she lost and will be bashed for that by Trumpsters everyday and twice in Sunday.


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?

I don't think either are qualified to be VP (as in, neither are qualified to be president, which should be the criteria for VP), but Abrams has a national profile focused on a specific issue - voter disenfranchisement. If she is VP, I would like to see her take that as a national platform and lead the Democrats. It is a drum that every Democrat should be beating continuously, and she does it better than anyone.


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 7726



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/20 2:35 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?


I know it because Amy Klobuchar pointed it out in the debates at least once. She seemed to be the only one of the federal-level candidates who was irritated that a local-level guy was up on the stage. My guess is that being the “gay mayor of South Bend” versus the “mayor of South Bend” was critical in getting him up there. But his speaking modulation and cadence (oratory skills?) is top notch and he may have done it even if a straight white male.


Stonington_QB



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 585
Location: Your safe space


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/20 7:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Flawed poll. Biden would never pick Stacey Abrams. She is a political deadman.


PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 15101
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/20 9:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
PUmatty wrote:


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?


I know it because Amy Klobuchar pointed it out in the debates at least once. She seemed to be the only one of the federal-level candidates who was irritated that a local-level guy was up on the stage. My guess is that being the “gay mayor of South Bend” versus the “mayor of South Bend” was critical in getting him up there. But his speaking modulation and cadence (oratory skills?) is top notch and he may have done it even if a straight white male.


Yes. Because so many gay men done that before. It's such an advantage ...


jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20140



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/09/20 3:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:
tfan wrote:
PUmatty wrote:


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?


I know it because Amy Klobuchar pointed it out in the debates at least once. She seemed to be the only one of the federal-level candidates who was irritated that a local-level guy was up on the stage. My guess is that being the “gay mayor of South Bend” versus the “mayor of South Bend” was critical in getting him up there. But his speaking modulation and cadence (oratory skills?) is top notch and he may have done it even if a straight white male.


Yes. Because so many gay men done that before. It's such an advantage ...


Uh. Come on. The world has changed and 'a' driving force in Democratic politics now is the woke identity wing of the base. Loud and proud and very much heard. Pete caught that wave and was a good story and the news media loved him. Mayor Pete. It all worked in his favor.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8067
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 10:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
PUmatty wrote:
tfan wrote:
PUmatty wrote:


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?


I know it because Amy Klobuchar pointed it out in the debates at least once. She seemed to be the only one of the federal-level candidates who was irritated that a local-level guy was up on the stage. My guess is that being the “gay mayor of South Bend” versus the “mayor of South Bend” was critical in getting him up there. But his speaking modulation and cadence (oratory skills?) is top notch and he may have done it even if a straight white male.


Yes. Because so many gay men done that before. It's such an advantage ...


Uh. Come on. The world has changed and 'a' driving force in Democratic politics now is the woke identity wing of the base. Loud and proud and very much heard. Pete caught that wave and was a good story and the news media loved him. Mayor Pete. It all worked in his favor.

Perhaps.

And yet the 2 candidates that made it through to the end are both older straight white males. This is "virtue signaling" at its finest, imo. We oh so woke and noble liberals were so very damn proud of how diverse our field of candidates was.

And then all the candidates of color disappeared.

And then the gay candidate.

And then the women.

When it comes down to it, as "woke" as we claim to be, when taken as a whole Democrats also fall back upon their implicit biases and drift toward the traditional power structures.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12715
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 10:41 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
When it comes down to it, as "woke" as we claim to be, when taken as a whole Democrats also fall back upon their implicit biases and drift toward the traditional power structures.


Hey. At least we've got the *Ageism* thing beat. Right? Razz



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 15101
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 10:42 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
jammerbirdi wrote:
PUmatty wrote:
tfan wrote:
PUmatty wrote:


You realize that Buttigieg ran statewide in Indiana and lost by a much, much bigger margin than Abrams?


I know it because Amy Klobuchar pointed it out in the debates at least once. She seemed to be the only one of the federal-level candidates who was irritated that a local-level guy was up on the stage. My guess is that being the “gay mayor of South Bend” versus the “mayor of South Bend” was critical in getting him up there. But his speaking modulation and cadence (oratory skills?) is top notch and he may have done it even if a straight white male.


Yes. Because so many gay men done that before. It's such an advantage ...


Uh. Come on. The world has changed and 'a' driving force in Democratic politics now is the woke identity wing of the base. Loud and proud and very much heard. Pete caught that wave and was a good story and the news media loved him. Mayor Pete. It all worked in his favor.

Perhaps.

And yet the 2 candidates that made it through to the end are both older straight white males. This is "virtue signaling" at its finest, imo. We oh so woke and noble liberals were so very damn proud of how diverse our field of candidates was.

And then all the candidates of color disappeared.

And then the gay candidate.

And then the women.

When it comes down to it, as "woke" as we claim to be, when taken as a whole Democrats also fall back upon their implicit biases and drift toward the traditional power structures.


Maybe.

I would note that this is the first time since 2004 that the Democratic nominee is going to be a white man.

I'd also note that Bernie Sanders would be the first Jewish president.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8067
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 11:10 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

PUmatty wrote:


Maybe.

I would note that this is the first time since 2004 that the Democratic nominee is going to be a white man.

I'd also note that Bernie Sanders would be the first Jewish president.

Bernie is not going to be the nominee.

People use the term "virtue signaling" as a negative, but I don't actually agree. As a post-structuralist, I have spent my entire academic career teaching the power of language how it shapes our reality. Obviously "virtue signaling" is not the desired end goal, that taking meaningful action and living one's words through deeds is exponentially superior. But because language shapes, "virtue signaling" is in and of itself a positive step along the way. Say something enough, and slowly you internalize it. And if enough people do it, culture can start to shift. It's only a problem if the signaling is embraced as the end of the road rather than the simply the on-ramp.

This being the case, I don't want to make a false equivalency between the GOP and Democrats on how aware they are of diversity, as just having such a diverse field to begin with makes it a possibility that someone emerges like Obama did. And after Obama there seemed to be a legitimate shift against the traditional biases.

But then Clinton lost an election that many felt she should have won to devastating consequences.

And now Democrats are scared. And scared people lean into their biases, exposing them.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
jammerbirdi



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 20140



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 11:57 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

One can look at this stuff so many different ways that it’s foolish to highlight these factually true data tidbits and draw beside the point conclusions from them. The story of this election is what happened. Not the perspective of one group or another. This is where we’re losing ourselves. What actually happened here? And what is happening now and moving forward?

The Democratic Party is going to likely put forth a candidate with declining cognitive and verbal capabilities to run against a sitting president whose own capabilities continue to be underestimated and downplayed by the many who are foolish enough to do so. Biden is inconceivable as the resultant nominee of this 2020 primary process! He can’t string 3 sentences together and yet Elizabeth Warren has withdrawn from the race?

Ask Amy Klobuchar, Mayor Pete and Beto why they didn’t drop out and endorse Elizabeth Warren instead of Biden the weekend before Super Tuesday!!!

People want to blame sexism or gender bias among voters. There’s clearly something else going on in the Democratic Party establishment than sexism. Warren’s politics were the problem, as are, of course, Bernie’s. I don’t believe the Democrats have been driven by the stated goal of putting forth the candidate with the best chance of defeating Donald Trump. I think the Democratic Party is focusing on another battle entirely and that is the internal one for the soul and direction of their own party.

They can deal with four more years of Donald Trump. They will all still be there in control of the Democratic Party throughout it all. What they cannot deal with on any level is a President Bernie Sanders. Because they will likely NOT be there if a Bernie Sanders or even an Elizabeth Warren were to take over the Democratic Party. And that’s just on a party level.

Looming larger as a force in this primary is the possibility of having the Democratic Party, after over a half century of moving toward the economic center, finally representative of a major American political party (and the White House) taken over by old school radical lefties bent on socialized medicine and debt relief and free education for all, etc.

This 21st century Democratic Party is simply one of the two parties of the rich. It’s bought and paid for by the most affluent people on this planet. Bernie Sanders would deliver, in principle at least, to the Oval Office, a President who represents a society that is seeking to correct age-old wrongs and gross economic inequality and societal unfairness that has turned our country into something that would have been unrecognizable and unimaginable 50 years ago.

The Democratic Party establishment would rather Donald Trump win a second term than for either Bernie Sanders or even Elizabeth Warren to get anywhere near the levers of power. It’s about politics. Money and privilege and the establishment elites maintaining their hold on all of it. Not sexism, sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity.

That’s my explanation of how we got here and where we’re going from this point and why. The sexism stuff or a preference for older white men is just window dressing.



_________________
Falsehood will fly on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps slow and solemn, she has neither the vigour nor activity to overtake her enemy. - Thomas Francklin
Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 10765



Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 1:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote




_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8067
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 2:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There are many factors at play. The implicit biases fall into place when comparing like minded candidates:

Why did progressives flock to Sanders instead of Warren?

Why did moderates flock to Biden instead of Klobuchar, Harris, or Buttigieg?

Why was it always older, straight white males that polled the highest amongst Democrats on the "electability" questions? You are right in that I don't think Biden actually is more electable than those other candidates, and his debate performances scare the crap out of me. Based upon actual performance, nothing he has done should inspire confidence that he is the one best suited to take on Trump. But yet it was a major factor in the decision making process of many, many Democratic voters. The fact that this perception is so prevalent while not being supported by any empirical evidence at all, and standing counter to what our eyes should be telling us about his strength as a candidate, screams for us to explore how we might be falling prey to our implicit biases.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12715
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 03/10/20 2:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

jammerbirdi wrote:
The Democratic Party establishment would rather Donald Trump win a second term than for either Bernie Sanders or even Elizabeth Warren to get anywhere near the levers of power. It’s about politics. Money and privilege and the establishment elites maintaining their hold on all of it. Not sexism, sexual orientation or religion or ethnicity.


Total truth. I can never foresee myself favoring the GOP over Democrats, but they are basically cut from the same cloth when it comes to maintaining power, and being beholden to the dictates of Corporate America and The Wealthy Elite. I have no doubt that's how Bernie got squeezed out of contention 4 years ago. Bernie/Elizabeth/AOC et.al., are NOT what Dems really want as their Power Brokers.

justintyme wrote:
The fact that this perception is so prevalent .... screams for us to explore how we might be falling prey to our implicit biases.


What's to *explore*? We have already learned how the majority of the American Electorate remains ill-informed and devoid of critical thinking skills, as they base their decisions on gottdamm fb feeds. It is this population that both parties manipulate mightily. It IS The American Way.

Personal Fantasy: Bernie runs as an Independent with [Stacey, Elizabeth, Oprah, Michelle, etc.] as his running mate, and Bloomberg finances Weld's independent campaign to siphon off disgruntled Trumpettes that can't bring themselves to vote Dem. 4 way race. Razz Cool



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin