Your next 2020 Democratic presidential primary thread: Now we're serious

At The Drive-In plays all the Inaugural Balls

lol Warren might but there's no way the rest that are getting crumbs are going to stick around to the end.

― sorry for butt rockin (Neanderthal), Thursday, February 27, 2020 1:55 PM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

None of them have had a hope in winning a majority since Nevada. Everyone except bernie biden and maybe bloomberg (lol) is playing for a brokered convention.

"I got a little bit left in me. please donate as much as you can right now - i'll put it to use in the next two weeks, then maybe i keep going, let's play it by ear"

these biden emails are getting out of control

in fact, we'll probably see some dropouts after SC. some after Super Tuesday.

I have a day in my mind called Super Wednesday, which is the day Buttigeig and Klobuchar finally fuck the fuck off.

it's Biden and Bernie now, and I doubt Biden will overcome Bernie's delegate lead tbh.

Ignore all that "brokered convention"/Bernie handwringing going on at the moment. This is the kind of shit that is really going to matter:

The battleground state of Pennsylvania is setting up to be a tight race in November, with President Trump in a statistical tie in theoretical head-to-head matchups with each of the top Democratic presidential candidates in the state, according to a new poll.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) fares best among Democratic candidates against Trump in Pennsylvania, based on the Muhlenberg College poll released Thursday.

Sanders, who is leading the field after the early voting states, has 49 percent of the vote compared to Trump’s 46 percent in the head-to-head match up. The candidates are in statistical dead-heat, falling within the poll’s 5.5 percentage point margin of error.

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) each tie Trump in the mock-up election poll, both getting the same 47 percent as Trump in the match-up, based on the poll.

keep in mind that polling in PA in 2016 greatly underestimated Trump's strength here

would assume some of the majors changed their methodology a bit, though I don't think Muhlenberg College is a 'major'

I don't really get why we should take head-to-head polling all that seriously this far out (whether it's encouraging or not)

that too. it's hard to tell how reliable it is when there is no official nominee, people just reacting to hypotheticals.

I have a day in my mind called Super Wednesday, which is the day Buttigeig and Klobuchar finally fuck the fuck off.

― but also fuck you (unperson), Thursday, February 27, 2020 1:12 PM (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Klobuchar? Maybe. Buttigieg? U dreaming.

Technically true, no? https://t.co/nNqQzrk8id

— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) February 27, 2020

What do we think the chances are that Sirota can pivot to going after Trump and the GOP if Bernie gets the nom? I’m guessing 50-50 at best

Man, that guy lives rent free in a few of y'all's heads huh

I can't imagine why a guy who works for Bernie Sanders would go after the party for a scheme that would exist entirely to ensure Sanders isn't the nominee.

as noted by Warren, in the last primal cycle Bernie's final tactic was to hope that that specific scheme (ie superdelegates) would ensure he was the nominee

I thought his final tactic was to stick around to push for a leftier platform

https://www.npr.org/2016/05/19/478705022/sanders-campaign-now-says-superdelegates-are-key-to-winning-nomination

tbh that wasn't "yay we love superdelegates now" as much as a pragmatic view of what it'd take to get the nomination. if you've got superdelegates, you've got to use em

underscoring my point that he doesn't have any issues with the system itself, just what ends they achieve

you can both believe the system needs reworking and also have to work within it. not sure what's unclear there

just clarifying that the Sanders campaign does not consider superdelegates

a scheme that would exist entirely to ensure Sanders isn't the nominee

so Biden goes from a 4 point lead to a 24 point lead in 2 days? how reliable are these polls really?

Man, that guy lives rent free in a few of y'all's heads huh

Every campaign needs an asshole, Sirota happens to be a bigger one.

I don't have much patience for Bernie folks yelling about the other candidates not wanting to let the people decide. As Warren said in her town hall last night, the DNC adopted rules. These are the rules that we currently have. That's not to say they are wholly defensible, but it seems crazy to just ignore them.

Given that the candidates are running for a particular political party's nomination, it seems reasonable to allow that party to have *some* control over the process. That said, I think it also is in the party's best interest to listen to and respect the will of the people, and they'd be equally crazy to deny Bernie the nomination if he's ahead. But what's the point of having a party at all if these decisions aren't actually up to them?

it's the Surprise Party

i never remember who this Sirota guy is

I only ever see him mentioned in these threads

But what's the point of having a party at all

fair question! I think the bigger q is why are there only two parties, and why is it only possible to elect a president out of these two parties

if there's no room for a party to shift at any pace other than glacially or via strong strategic takeover (see: Gingrich in the 90s, unfortunately) then we really need more viable parties or at the very least, more diverse coalitions within the party

We don’t really have political parties. I’ve been a dues-paying member of the IWW, the UAW (I think that was what Kroger’s Union was organized) and the SPUSA, but there’s no mechanism for me to join the Democratic Party and have any say over its platform or rules.

someone in the office here recently panicked that the Republicans canceling some of their state primaries was "fascism," apparently unaware that parties can legally change their processes however they like

but there’s no mechanism for me to join the Democratic Party and have any say over its platform or rules.

this is demonstrably untrue.

it's called winning an election as a Democrat, or being nominated (or hired) to a position within the party apparatus.

such a bizarre statement to say we don't have parties!

not to mention there are locally held elections to serve as delegates to state party conferences, you can nominate yourself and try to get people to vote for you.

here's a link about how to become a delegate for the California Democratic Party, for example: https://www.cadem.org/our-party/adem

I think the bigger q is why are there only two parties

this isn't that big a question - it's a natural outgrowth of the winner-take-all rules in the Constitution

the state of basic civics education in this country is pretty depressing

you want more than one party, you need a system that incorporates proportional representation - which leads to multiple parties and coalitions. You want two parties - a majority and a minority party - you set up a winner-take-all system.

Miraculously, while various Founding Fathers bemoaned political parties in general, they didn't figure this out or anticipate it.

er you want more than TWO parties

that should say

But what's the point of having a party at all if these decisions aren't actually up to them?

but the party does make the decision--by allowing the members of the party to vote in primaries

the day Buttigeig and Klobuchar finally fuck the fuck off

So not gonna happen until Bernie has it wrapped up with a bow, which ofc may or may not happen before the convention.

even Kascich gave up the ghost eventually

Omg he's dead?

“Become an elected official and then you can have a say in the party” = we don’t have parties in any meaningful sense.

I, a normal person, have no actual say in the Democratic platform or legislative agenda.

jfc read the link I posted

all you have to do is be a registered Democrat in your District and run in an internal party election.

milo is is saying fuck the noise about running for office, i think

here let me c+p it for you

AD Delegates to the Democratic State Central Committee (DSCC) are responsible for planning and attending informational meetings throughout the region and working with other DSCC delegates throughout California to represent their community.

AD Delegates are elected by voters (to participate in the ADEM you MUST be a registered Democrat in that Assembly District).

AD Delegates vote on behalf of the community they represent at CDP Regional Meetings, the California Democratic Party Convention, and those who are also elected to serve as an Executive Board member are responsible for voting and representing their community at the semi-annual E-Board meetings.

like omg a political party expects you to have the support of members of your party in order to have a say in how the party is run

it's almost as if there's some wilful ignorance going on here

yeah but i think what you're missing is that you can't post an angry tweet fb status or ilx post and thereby change the party platform