Warren.

Very curious about this one, comrade.

Biden with Warren as running mate. Mr and Mrs America, Uncle Affable and Mrs Policy Wonk. How could you miss?

The vindictive part of me wants Biden to win the nomination, and then watch with glee as he loses the presidency - as he obviously will - and watch democrats wonder HOW THIS COULD HAVE POSSIBLY HAPPENED.

But Bernie yes.

Sanders on how big Jeremy Corbyn's win will be. If Sanders is nominated, it would be deja vue all over again.

The vindictive part of me wants Biden to win the nomination, and then watch with glee as he loses the presidency - as he obviously will - and watch democrats wonder HOW THIS COULD HAVE POSSIBLY HAPPENED. — StreetlightX

The nihilist in me would love nothing better than to see a debate between Biden and Trump, two sundowning men who can't speak longer than 120 seconds before digressing into jabberwacky. Trump, the more brash, slightly more senile of the two would undeniably get the upper hand by attacking Biden's 40 year record of political blunders (his only saving grace being the VP of a beloved president). The ultimate manifestation of a sundowning nation.

I dunno I think they should just challenge each other to a push-up competition and whoever wins gets it.

lmao

What I hate hearing is 'how likely it is for Trump to win a second term'. This doesn't mean I don't believe it's possible, because I do. It's just that after all that has happened, after the many obvious disasters and malfeasance and constant barrage of lies, the fact that this can still be a prospect, even considered by otherwise intelligent people, makes by blood run cold. It's like, how can the world be this f***ed, that someone like that is even considered?

I think you underestimate just how much the establishment is despised. Like, consider that people are aware of all the things you listed about Trump, and yet the establishment would be worse that even all that.

I'll be voting 3rd party for president - especially since I'm currently a resident of a "red state" where a Democratic presidental candidate can't win - as I have since 1984 (except in 2008). I've been a "Bernie Bro" since '92 and would have voted for him in 2016 had the Dems (re: DNC, state parties & Obama ... aided & abetted by the effective media blackout of the Sanders campaign) not delegitimized themselves by, in effect, rigging the primaries in Shillary's favor. Warren is (mostly) progressive, a whip-smart lawyer and a woman who doesn't 'grate on' suburban (white) women like Shillary did (apparently she always has!) - a demographic that has rapidly abandoned tRUMP & GOP candidates for Dems since 2017. She also has more of the common touch - with her deep Midwestern & Texan working-class roots - than gruff old Bernie as evident by her consistently polling better (so far) than him with African Americans - the Democratic Party's indispensable demographic. As a foil for tRUMP, "Pocahantas" - the first senator to call for his impeachment in May 2019 on the floor of the Senate - will be perfect. And she'll 'inherit' Bernie's extensive grassroots network of smalls donors & volunteers for the general election as well. Lastly, she's almost a decade younger - I'm over 50, comrade! - and don't think it's 'ageist' to prefer her also on that account. It's time for a very smart, strong, left(ish) woman in the White House to join - complement - the current lady badass Speaker of the House.

I'd vote for either Sanders or Warren.

Sanders is 78; Warren is 70. Biden is 77; Pelosi is 79; Bloomberg is 77. Buttigieg is 37. Klobuchar is 59. Trump clearly has the most youthful mind of all the candidates -- mid-teens. People in their 70s often have agile, resilient minds. What most people in their 70s and 80s do not have in abundance is the kind of endurance one would find in a much younger person.

I don't think the Democratic Demolition Derby Debates has been helpful to the party or to the public. In the good old days, the party bosses got together in 'a smoke filled room' and had a frank discussion about the would-be candidates. They decided who would be prepped to win the nominating convention. Of course, potential candidates had a role in all this; but they had to pass muster with the party's political experts and power players before anything else happened.

The back room system wasn't all bad. Candidates who had a good chance of embarrassing the party were deflected; candidates whose closets were well populated with skeletons could be interviewed frankly about their histories. The press back in the good old days was far more likely than the press today to extend personal privacy to candidates. John F. Kennedy was thus able to carry on an apparently very active sex life with all sorts of women, and the reporters and editors closed their eyes.

We probably won't be going back to the good old days, but it seems to me that the old system of experts picking the candidates had some merits.

Trump clearly has the most youthful mind of all the candidates -- mid-teens — Bitter Crank

:rofl:

In the near future I'll provide a larger, general post about why I prefer Sanders over Warren (which has only strengthened over the past few months given a number of notable campaign and policy slips from Warren), but there is one quick point I want to make here:

She also has more of the common touch - with her deep Midwestern & Texan working-class roots - than gruff old Bernie as evident by her consistently polling better (so far) than him with African Americans — 180 Proof

I think this has largely been untrue for quite sometime. Politico's robust polling has shown that since February 2019, African American voters have consistently leaned toward Sanders over Warren. Most recently polling (mid-December 2019) currently shows that Bernie supporters were 6% more likely to be African American contra Warren supporters who are 29% less likely to be African American. Additional polling substantiates this, increasingly within the last few months as Bernie's "electability" becomes increasingly viable, and as other candidates favored by Black Americans, such as Harris and Booker, dropped out, even over Biden (who otherwise continues to enjoy the majority of Black American support), and a recent polling show that more Black Americans would strongly consider voting for Sanders in the General over Warren in the GE by 30%.

I will be sitting out the Wisconsin primary due to the fact that the candidates I choose never come close. I may even sit out the General due to another fact, viz. if voting really made a difference, they would make it illegal. Even if Yang became President Yang, he would be made ineffective by the Big Oil and Wall Street owned Republicans in the Senate, not to mention the largely right wing judiciary.

The Constitution was designed to disallow a “tyranny of the majority.” By “minority” they meant the property owners. Now it’s the corporations. It will be the same old shit. Mark my words.

But if you are like me and you are tired of and embarrassed by our mentally ill and cognitively disabled president, then vote.

My opinion, much like the party bosses who said that an office boy like Harry Truman could be President, is that a Labrador retriever could easily do the bidding of the transnational corporations.

Sanders is the only Democratic candidate with a majority of people of color who support him while Warren’s support leans heavily towards a narrower white and affluent base. Some sharper Warren supporters I’ve talked to speculated it’s because she’s not as well known while Sanders gained more favorability over the past few years while he was in the spotlight, but we don’t know yet and the election is this year.

But by this point, she pretty much sabotaged her own campaign in the past few months, the former CAP Clinton campaign consultants working for her right now probably influenced her decision making more so than the grassroots support she had.

Tulsi. You see what a dreamer I am. I also like Cory, even though he's out. Not his leftward-swerving self recently, but the centrist, business-oriented Democrat he's been for the 20 years BEFORE he decided to run for president. I always like him and thought he'd be a good president. His leftward move was perceived as inauthentic and that doomed his campaign.

Of the candidates with an actual shot: Biden, way too corrupt and represents everything wrong with DC. Wrong on every issue for the past 40 years. Drug warrior, supporter of the ruinous foreign wars. No Biden. Just no. He's Hillary 2.0. Liz, no. Mayor Pete, he's very likable, he might be the best of the bunch. I like Bernie's feistiness but I'm not a socialist. In fact the part of me that likes Bernie is the same part of me that likes Trump. Blow up the system because it ain't working. There's a lot of overlap between Bernie and Trump supporters.

To put this in context, I live in California which will go for whatever Dem gets nominated. So my vote doesn't count. I will be voting for Tulsi in the March primary as a show of support for the one genuinely anti-war Dem. And that vote won't matter either.

There's a lot of overlap between Bernie and Trump supporters — fishfry

According to a recent Emerson poll, only 4% of Bernie supporters will vote for Trump if Bernie doesn't get the election. Compare this with Buttigieg, Warren, and Biden at 12%, 10% and 9%, respectively.

I stand corrected. After reading several recent polls of black voters in South Carolina - ignoring Biden's name-recognition & Obama-associated popularity - Warren & Sanders are statistically tied across the board. I suspect that if Biden loses 2 out of 3 or all 3 primaries before South Carolina, the "black vote" will be up for grabs going into Super Tuesday. Whoever pulls away from the pack - I really see Biden dropping out (as he did in 1988 & 2008) - after Super Tuesday black voters will (begin to) overwhelmingly support anyway. My money is still on Warren. March 3rd can't come quick enough ...

According to a recent Emerson poll, only 4% of Bernie supporters WILL vote for Trump if Bernie doesn't get the election. Compare this with Buttigieg, Warren, and Biden at 12%, 10% and 9%, respectively. — Maw

Meaningless. Each poll is only a single data-point ("snapshot"); it takes a series of polls to exhibit a trend (curve) of data-points from which a prediction can be inferred.

I'll be voting Bernie in the Democratic primaries, but probably whoever wins the Green ticket in the general (living as I do in California; if you live in a "safe" state, vote 3rd party, whether you lean left or right, vote your conscience! If you live in a "swing" state, vote Democrat just to press away from the worst of all options).

I'm sorely tempted to support Yang just because he actually backs a UBI which I think is probably the most important progressive idea seriously raised in American history, but I think the ticket is going to come down to Bernie vs Biden and Biden's a lot worse, so I've got to vote strategically there. Warren would also be an acceptable win, though I'm a little turned off by how nominally "pro-capitalism" she is, but I think she just doesn't understand what the word "capitalism" means and is really just pro-market, anti-command-economy, which, sure, duh, but that's not what capitalism vs socialism is about.

I also think that Bernie has the best chance of beating Trump in the general election, and might actually consider voting Democrat in the general just to send the DNC the message that they didn't fuck up horribly this time and to please do more like that. (The point of voting Green is to tell the DNC "you lost a vote to these guys, be more like them").

if voting really made a difference, they would make it illegal. — Noah Te Stroete

:ok:

if you live in a "safe" state, vote 3rd party, whether you lean left or right, vote your conscience! If you live in a "swing" state, vote Democrat just to press away from the worst of all options — Pfhorrest

:clap: Fellow traveler - rage-voting against the two-headed party machine! Why do 'they' keep throwing away their votes by "swing state" voting in "safe states" or not voting at all? Fools want to tear down The System that their lesser-evilism, live poor vote rich conformity & lazy (cynical) non-voting has turned into this fetid pluto/kleptocratic "swamp" AND YET is all that stands (however porously) between their succulent, flabby resentments and the predacious bankster-gangster gators crocs snakes pirahna etc in their midst.

I am looking closer into Andrew Yang right now.

I liked Castro - although I'm pretty sure America is not yet ready for a President Castro. On those occasions the news reported on him, I thought he was pretty smart. Booker, too wide-eyed, but season for eight years or so and he could be an obvious choice.

I had been thinking a Warren/Castro or a Warren/Booker ticket might be good. I think Warren could be a great president. But at the same time, is the current crop the best Democrats could do? Something's deeply wrong either with that picture, or with my perception of it. Who knows where we'd be if Obama had had even a little bit of support from Congressional Republicans, but they betrayed their oaths and their country without a second thought - and that seems to be part of their job description.

So the House and Senate are both problems, the one to remain in Democrat control, the other for Democrats to win. Because it's clear that until Mitch, Lindsay, Ted, and the other traitors are cast out, the United States of America will continue its downward trend.

I will say that even less than a year ago I oscillated from Sanders to Warren, and that my vote would simply go for whoever was leading the other prior to the NY primary (April 28th). However, the last few months have made me increasingly weary or at least less enthusiastic of Warren, and while I unequivocally prefer her to the other candidates, my own political ideology, understanding of historical change and dialectics, and, frankly, the recent blunders made by Warren and her campaign, have convinced me to lend my full support for Bernie.

Warren and her campaign team have made a notable series of blunders that, to my mind, demonstrates poor political acumen. The Native American DNA fiasco demonstrated shoddy political judgement, particularly vis-à-vis prodding by Donald Trump. Had she made this decision now, any momentum her campaign currently has would likely screech to a halt. And while the Native American stuff hasn't and won't come up in the primary, you better bet that Trump will lean into it hard in the general. Additionally, her decision to first pursue a private-public healthcare option, only to then formulate a comprehensive Medicare-For-All legislation sans private insurance as late as her third year in office would effectively stifle the momentum that bona fide Medicare-For-All would have and make it harder to pursue. Healthcare is consistently ranked one of the most important policy issues, particularly among Democrats, and Warren's waffling on the subject is correlated with her atrophying support as she moved from the second place position, to third behind Sanders. She also mishandled the recent controversy with Bernie Sanders and potentially widened the animosity between the two camps which could have repercussions in the primary and broader repercussions for a progressive/socialist alliance. There are an array other concerns (e.g. endorsing Clinton over Sanders in 2016, despite the latter encouraging her to run against Clinton...and she probably would have won!) from policy to campaign judgement, but it's not my goal to be comprehensive here, just to outline a broad overview of objections.

And as cathartic as it may be to see Trump lose to a women in 2020, politics isn't aesthetics (liberals and conservatives often confuse it for one).

But my original reasoning for supporting Sanders over Warren is in their distinct theories of how social and political change occur. In true Democratic Socialism fashion, Bernie is (and has been since 2016) clearly focused on building and energizing a wider social movement so that even if he doesn't win the presidency, or after his political career is over, there is still a strong grassroots momentum to demand political change, which, beyond Sander's own message, is further substantiated by over 5M individual donors and donation numbers, rally turnout, and loyal following. Warren, while also having a solid donor and supporter base, nevertheless leans into a more technocratic approach, which locates social/economic/political changes not with a broader worker class-focused movement but with elite-decision makers (e.g. "Warren Has A Plan For That").

Meaningless. Each poll is only a single data-point ("snapshot"); it takes a series of polls to exhibit a trend (curve) of data-points from which a prediction can be inferred. — 180 Proof

The tense isn't exactly relevant, my point is that it's mistaken to claim there is a substantive overlap between Sanders and Trump supporters.

According to a recent Emerson poll, only 4% of Bernie supporters will vote for Trump if Bernie doesn't get the election. Compare this with Buttigieg, Warren, and Biden at 12%, 10% and 9%, respectively. — Maw

That's a very interesting statistic. It's contrary to what I would guess. My sense is that if the DNC screws Bernie out of the nomination again (whether they did or didn't, the Bernie brigade believes they did) they will stay home in droves. That is my personal belief, polls notwithstanding. And for what it's worth, if 2016 taught us anything, it's that people no longer tell pollsters the truth; and that the respondents don't accurately represent the general population. It's not 1950 anymore when getting a phone call was a big deal and being asked your opinion by an authority figure an even bigger one. People are a lot more sophisticated now, not to mention cynical. We're all accustomed to random phone calls from scammers of all kinds. People don't even answer their phones anymore unless it's someone they know.

I say wait and see. Bernie is actually leading Biden in Iowa and New Hampshire. Just as Nancy Pelosi pulls him off the campaign trail to sit in Washington for the impeachment theater. Liz too. What a coincidence. Who could ever have seen that coming? Not Nancy, who stalled the process a month after telling us what an immediate emergency we were in.

Anyway, that's my opinion. The Bernie brigade played ball in 2016 but they won't play ball this time if, as is all but certain, the DNC screws Bernie. They don't want another 1972.

The question isn't whether they vote for Trump. They'll just stay home. Then your statistic would still be right yet miss the point. That pollster should have asked about the stay home factor.

The question isn't whether they vote for Trump. They'll just stay home. Then your statistic would still be right yet miss the point. That pollster should have asked about the stay home factor. — fishfry

You originally said there was a lot of overlap between Sanders and Trump supporters, so now I'm not sure what "the point" is because it seems to have changed.

You originally said there was a lot of overlap between Sanders and Trump supporters, so now I'm not sure what "the point" is because it seems to have changed. — Maw

I still believe that. You quoted me a poll to the contrary. I said that I nevertheless still hold my opinion.

Warren, Sanders and Klobuchar will be tied up in impeachment (though they should recuse), limiting much of their campaigning time, keeping them away from Iowa for much of the final two weeks before the Feb. 3 caucuses. This was a master-stroke of the corporate wing of the DNC.

:wink:

NYT Endorses Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar