Support NeoGAF

[whyamihere]

I have no idea who would win on Trump versus Gillibrand, and it takes me a lot to admit kirblar is right about something (no offense boo), but it's kind of silly to say Gillibrand couldn't talk to the rural working class!! when that was the entire reason she was able to win in 2006 to begin with.

I have nothing else to talk to beyond that since talking about 2020 is generally stupid.

 

[tbm24]

My hope for 2020 is that we can get through the primary without Rigged being screamed left and right. I don't think I can stomach the delusion for another 4 years.

 

[Anoregon]

I have no idea who would win on Trump versus Gillibrand, and it takes me a lot to admit kirblar is right about something (no offense boo), but it's kind of silly to say Gillibrand couldn't talk to the rural working class!! when that was the entire reason she was able to win in 2006 to begin with.

I have nothing else to talk to beyond that since talking about 2020 is generally stupid.

It's infinitely less stupid than rehashing the 2016 democratic primary, at least.

But then again, so is literally every fucking thing.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

real median household income in 2015 was $56,516 nationally. columbia's was $58,335. that is not "wealthy".

It is wealthier than the national average. If you are a resident of Columbia, you are statistically likely to be better off than the median American. kirblar is trying and failing to portray Gillibrand as a crusader for the lower middle class; Columbia is upper middle class by definition of being... above the middle.

 

[cordy]

No offense to Bernie but I'm not sure if his body will allow him to handle this election run let alone a potential Presidency seat.

 

[El_Tiguere]

The whole business with his wife and that university, the rape essay, support of Fidel Castro, praising breadlines

The right would have gone nuts with it.

Tell that to an independent young voter.

Wife and the university? easy to understand what happened, versus Trump University. Trump loses that one.

Rape essay? running against a candidate who actually raped his ex-wife and came out advocating for sexual assault? Trump loses that one against the most well-liked candidate of all.

Support for Fidel Castro? was it when he praised the health care system in Cuba, which Americans are craving for? Trump loses that one.

Running against Bernie also GUTS Trump of his main shtick with blue-collar workers... which was the FACT that the economy is rigged in favor of the wealthy. In one corner you have a billionaire sleazebag who openly says he has bought politicians, and in the other you have a well-liked statesman who has made it his point in life to fight inequality in all forms.

If you are an an independent or a young voter... you are NOT sitting that one out if given those two options. The choice becomes quite clear, which is precisely why Bernie always had a 60/40 margin against Trump is most polls.

 

[Fenderputty]

Polls are what have accurately or semi-accurately predicted elections for decades but because you clintonites chose to ignore them in favor of your "Queen" they suddenly stop being relevent?

It's unfortunate none of the polls had King Savior Bernie beating Clinton then, right?

 

[Henchmen21]

Polls showed Hillary beating Trump running up to the election, are polls suddenly accurate for the hypothetical Sanders vs Trump even though the reality of Hillary vs Trump showed that polling during the election might have had serious issues?



To be quite clear, this is a recess week, right after this we'll have to go back to clenching our butts on healthcare. Why do we have to do this again?

No they weren't. They were always within MOE (with minor spikes around the convention).

And Bernie has said that he plans on introducing a "Medicare-for-all" bill once the AHCA has been beat down again.

 

[MrGerbils]

You may have missed it but reality doesn't operate on rock-paper-scissors mechanics in a game. You have to beat all the opponents you face to progress to victory. Bernie lost to Hillary. Hillary lost to Trump.

Which speaks nothing to the fact that Bernie most likely would have beat Trump in a general election between the two.

You may have missed it, but I was using a metaphor to describe why it's idiotic to say that it's a matter of fact that because Bernie lost to Clinton in a primary that he would have also lost to Trump in the general. Two totally different contests with different people voting and different candidates to choose between could end in different results.

 

[eBay Huckster]

It is wealthier than the national average. If you are a resident of Columbia, you are statistically likely to be better off than the median American. kirblar is trying and failing to portray Gillibrand as a crusader for the lower middle class; Columbia is upper middle class by definition of being... above the middle.

well, fuck, guess it's unquestionably upper middle class (which, uh, i thought we were saying it was "wealthy"?) and unusable in any context relevant to Adhering to the Median Voter because it's slightly above the national median in a data set with a margin of error equivalent to $4,000

e: for funsies, there are 19 counties in ohio with higher median incomes, of which i'd only really characterize medina, union, geauga, warren, and delaware as particularly well off. and i've been in delaware, geauga and union a whole fuckin' lot.

 

[kirblar]

You're still doing it, you're just using 'complete' counties to give you an out, since it allows you to ignore Dutchess, the vast majority of which was in NY 20, it allows you to ignore Columbia, the vast majority of which was in NY 20, it allows you to ignore Saratoga, the vast majority of which was in NY 20. These are all very wealthy districts, and you just won't stop cherry-picking to get away from it.

I am confident Trump would beat Gillibrand. This would be awful for America and those who are most vulnerable. The idea that you would seriously put her forward as a candidate is depressing beyond all belief. Pick Harris, pick Cortez-Masto, pick Brown, pick literally anyone else.

The population centers in Dutchess are in the southwest and were not part of NY-20.

Saratoga - 71,496
Rensselaer - 60,709
Otsego - 48,588
Essex - 52,758
Dutchess County - 71,904
Delaware - 43,720

This is hardly a list of "wealthy" places.

 

[ZeoVGM]

Polls are what have accurately or semi-accurately predicted elections for decades but because you clintonites chose to ignore them in favor of your "Queen" they suddenly stop being relevent?

It's also revisionist history bs. Clintonites ego's are so tied to her that they think if she couldn't beat Trump, than no one could. And they have the gall to say republican's use alternate facts?

This is so fucking embarrassing.

"Clintonites."

I was a big Hillary supporter so you've given me some nickname as an insult. To give you a quick dose of reality: I voted for Bernie in the primary. He lost. I then supported Hillary in the general.

So take your ignorant bullshit generalizations and shove it.

 

[Moofers]

Until somebody younger shows up to the party with the same plan as Bernie, he will have my vote. Everyone else sucks.

 

[Fenderputty]

If Bernie doesn't save liberals in 2020 he will upload his consciousness into a machine for the liberal / machine takeover in 2024 after 4 more years of conservative darkness.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

To all the interdimensional travelers proclaiming Bernie would have beat Trump let me remind you of the other dimensions in which Bernie beats Hillary but then lost to Trump, and how Hillary would have won had Bernie not beaten her. I mean if we're going to make comicesque alternative timelines arguments then we should at least include them all.

 

[belushy]

I backed Bernie during the primaries.... I need some time to think on this because for right now I don't know if I can get behind it.

Personally I want to see what Mayor Pete can do....

 

[Henchmen21]

This is so fucking embarrassing.

"Clintonites."

I was a big Hillary supporter so you've given me some nickname as an insult. To give you a quick dose of reality: I voted for Bernie in the primary. He lost. I then supported Hillary in the general.

So take your ignorant bullshit generalizations and shove it.

Wrong, not an insult. Catch-all term for the Clinton wing of the party. Just like Berniecrat is a catch all term for our wing of the party.

 

[Skyline Owl]

fuckin' lol jesus christ no.

 

[StormKing]

Sanders did lose the primary. But it can hardly be ignored that Hillary Clinton had very significant advantages. Many senior Democrats didn't even bother running. I can't say for sure whether Bernie would have won this election. But I am sure he would have run a better campaign than Clinton. No private email server, no DNC collusion, no private face and public face, no deplorables comment, no Pepe is a white supremacist, no I'm not establishment because I'm a woman and no why am i not 50 pts ahead. Hillary's campaign was a catastrophe. She thought that she'd get away with it because Trump is terrible. Turns out that strategy doesn't get Democrats to the polls in swing states. I'd prefer Warren to run but Sanders is fine with me as well.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The population centers in Dutchess are in the southwest and were not part of NY-20.

Saratoga - 71,496
Rensselaer - 60,709
Otsego - 48,588
Essex - 52,758
Dutchess County - 71,904
Delaware - 43,720

This is hardly a list of "wealthy" places.

You quoted 3 counties that are wealthier than the national average, two of them very significantly so, in an attempt to demonstrate that this is a district that predominantly represents the lower working class. I think your perceptions of who is well off are all out of whack.

 

[Fenderputty]

To all the interdimensional travelers proclaiming Bernie would have beat Trump let me remind you of the other dimensions in which Bernie beats Hillary but then lost to Trump, and how Hillary would have won had Bernie not beaten her. I mean if we're going to make comicesque alternative timelines arguments then we should at least include them all.

I prefer the timeline in which Martin O'Malley wins and the US has a yearly competition with Canada for who's main political squeeze is the hunkiest.

 

[El_Tiguere]

It's unfortunate none of the polls had King Savior Bernie beating Clinton then, right?

If you went by under 45, young, and independents? (you know... those who could have won an election against Trump). Of course Bernie was beating Hillary handily in those segments. The 55+ DNC lapdog crowd got their candidate, however...

Sanders did lose the primary. But it can hardly be ignored that Hillary Clinton had very significant advantages. Many senior Democrats didn't even bother running. I can't say for sure whether Bernie would have won this election. But I am sure he would have run a better campaign than Clinton. No private email server, no DNC collusion, no private face and public face, no deplorables comment, no Pepe is a white supremacist, no I'm not establishment because I'm a woman and no why am i not 50 pts ahead. Hillary's campaign was a catastrophe. She thought that she'd get away with it because Trump is terrible. Turns out that strategy doesn't get Democrats to the polls in swing states. I'd prefer Warren to run but Sanders is fine with me as well.

"But Trump was going to call him a socialist!!!! sudden political DEATH!!" - says every Clinton apologist.

 

[Atom Heart Mother]

ah yes put up the man that lost a primary to hillary clinton to go against a sitting president

this is a brilliant idea

 

[UnemployedVillain]

Sanders did lose the primary. But it can hardly be ignored that Hillary Clinton had very significant advantages. Many senior Democrats didn't even bother running. I can't say for sure whether Bernie would have won this election. But I am sure he would have run a better campaign than Clinton. No private email server, no DNC collusion, no private face and public face, no deplorables comment, no Pepe is a white supremacist, no I'm not establishment because I'm a woman and no why am i not 50 pts ahead. Hillary's campaign was a catastrophe. She thought that she'd get away with it because Trump is terrible. Turns out that strategy doesn't get Democrats to the polls in swing states. I'd prefer Warren to run but Sanders is fine with me as well.

So he wouldn't have had things specific to Clinton? No shit. He would have had his own set of "controversies" to deal with. Like his current FBI investigation, his "White people can't be poor" comment, and a wealth of other small things people blow up because they care more about personalities than actually platforms and qualifications

 

[kirblar]

It is wealthier than the national average. If you are a resident of Columbia, you are statistically likely to be better off than the median American. kirblar is trying and failing to portray Gillibrand as a crusader for the lower middle class; Columbia is upper middle class by definition of being... above the middle.

No, I put her name out there because I think she's by far the most skilled politician we have among our current class of options.

You're the one who immediately brought class-related issues into it, claiming that she represented a wealthy "Romney Republican" district.

You quoted 3 counties that are wealthier than the national average, two of them very significantly so, in an attempt to demonstrate that this is a district that predominantly represents the lower working class. I think your perceptions of who is well off are all out of whack.

Again, you're the one who keeps bringing up class. Not me. I'm not fixated on it. I want someone who can actually speak to all kinds of people, and there's stuff I've read/heard from her (especially on racial issues) where I think she can thread the needles that you need to in order to speak to different constituencies.

 

[VendettaRed07]

I have no idea who would win on Trump versus Gillibrand, and it takes me a lot to admit kirblar is right about something (no offense boo), but it's kind of silly to say Gillibrand couldn't talk to the rural working class!! when that was the entire reason she was able to win in 2006 to begin with.

I have nothing else to talk to beyond that since talking about 2020 is generally stupid.

To me it seems she at least has the work ethic to do better with rural voters than Hillary did.

Campaigning helps. Going by the results from the rest of the primary, Hillary won Iowa in the primary in a format that worked against her, in a state that demographically did not favor her at all, because she contested, and worked hard and reached out to people.

Yet she really didn't do that in states like Iowa at any other point, primary or general after. Bernie and Trump swept in areas similar to that from that point on. Because they campaigned and worked there where as she did not and thought running up the numbers in cities would be enough.

Gillibrand I think regardless of how she is "predetermined" to be perceived in these areas can be made better if she actually puts in the effort of doing it.

 

[ZeoVGM]

We'll never know if Bernie would have won, but the notion that Trump was invincible is completely absurd and defeatist.

No, it's not. It's focusing the reality of the situation because we saw what happened.

A video was released that showed Trump literally admitting he thinks sexual assault is okay (and could easily be taken as admitting to sexual assault).

I'm not a defeatist. I think we have a very good chance in 2020. But looking back at 2016 and being honest with myself is not defeatism. Every single person who voted for Trump knew of that video and was okay with it.

And it's absurd that I think Trump was winning in 2016 no matter what? Really? Absurd?

 

[quesalupa]

Yes. Let Bernie be the President and make sure you get a solid VP in case Bernie dies or if he needs to run things behind the scenes.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I prefer the timeline in which Martin O'Malley wins and the US has a yearly competition with Canada for who's main political squeeze is the hunkiest.

Got to give it to Trudeau.

 

[Fenderputty]

If you went by under 45, young, and independents? (you know... those who could have won an election against Trump). Of course Bernie was beating Hillary handily in those segments. The 55+ DNC lapdog crowd got their candidate, however...

Awsome ... now that we've isolated out our voting block, we just need to figure out how to make them turn out in numbers. Not just numbers to beat the GOP in a head to head, but numbers to beat out that pesky democratic voting block that always has and always will turnout in the ways we saw during the primary.

 

[Henchmen21]

So he wouldn't have had things specific to Clinton? No shit. He would have had his own set of "controversies" to deal with. Like his current FBI investigation, his "White people can't be poor" comment, and a wealth of other small things people blow up because they care more about personalities than actually platforms and qualifications

That's why Medicare For All is polling at 60%? That's the whole nation btw not just Democrats (who its polling at is 83%). People care about policy not "I'm not Trump!"

 

[jack_package_200]

I prefer the timeline in which Martin O'Malley wins and the US has a yearly competition with Canada for who's main political squeeze is the hunkiest.

Macron tho

 

[Isaac Otherworld]

Because I don't have the original avatar and I'm too lazy to go find it

But thanks for dragging me into your obsession.

"Obsession?" Whatever dude. I was having a back and forth with someone who didn't think Hillgaf existed.

But I think you're real.

 

[Steel]

I prefer the timeline in which Martin O'Malley wins and the US has a yearly competition with Canada for who's main political squeeze is the hunkiest.

That's not even a contest with Trudeau. One guy's just not-bad looking with a fit body, the other is basically a prince straight out of a disney movie.

 

[eBay Huckster]

That's not even a contest with Trudeau. One guy's just not-bad looking with a fit body, the other is basically a prince straight out of a disney movie.

i didn't realize you felt so strongly about o'malley

 

[The Technomancer]

That's why Medicare For All is polling at 60%? That's the whole nation btw not just Democrats (who its polling at is 83%). People care about policy not "I'm not Trump!"

Gun control has polled at 90% for like a decade. How has that policy affected how people vote?

 

[dramatis]

No they weren't. They were always within MOE (with minor spikes around the convention).

And Bernie has said that he plans on introducing a "Medicare-for-all" bill once the AHCA has been beat down again.

But there hasn't been polls of an actual Sanders vs Trump race as opposed to a hypothetical one. You could try to poll a hypothetical Hillary vs McCain, but that doesn't mean that poll accurately indicates an election result after months of campaigning.

The Medicare for all bill isn't going to pass, and it does not even matter if it is introduced. Healthcare has to be focused on because Republicans can always fold for tax cuts for the rich. Sanders introducing some bill will not solve the actual problem of the sword constantly hanging over Obamacare, ready to cut 23 million people's healthcare.

This is not me being pro-Hillary or anti-Sanders, but can you not cling onto Sanders hoping he'll save America? It is troubling to me how little people understand about the current situation. "Sanders will introduce Medicare for All!" is not an answer to anything about the BRCA, which is the Senate version of the bill, not the AHCA.

 

[Steel]

i didn't realize you felt so strongly about o'malley

... But seriously, what do people see in O'Malley?

 

[El_Tiguere]

Awsome ... now that we've isolated out our voting block, we just need to figure out how to make them turn out in numbers. Not just numbers to beat the GOP in a head to head, but numbers to beat out that pesky democratic voting block that always has and always will turnout in the ways we saw.

That pesky democratic block needs to fall in line with what Americans want. Single payer, a solution to student debt, a fair economy that doesn't favor the wealthy, a justice system that doesn't favor the wealthy (and white people), pro-worker anti-corporate legislation and focus... do all of those things and the young, the independent, and workers on either side will give you the win. Once the democratic neoliberal block is FORCED to fall in line (because it WILL be against Trump), you will have 52-55% of the electoral vote on your side.

 

[Fenderputty]

Macron tho

Almost half a foot shorter than his NA hunky counterparts.

 

[GurgleBot20]

*Clears Throat*

She wouldn't have won the primary if she were named "Legend of Belda!"

 

[Father_Brain]

No, it's not. It's focusing the reality of the situation because we saw what happened.

A video was released that showed Trump literally admitting he thinks sexual assault is okay (and could easily be taken as admitting to sexual assault).

I'm not a defeatist. I think we have a very good chance in 2020. But looking back at 2016 and being honest with myself is not defeatism. Every single person who voted for Trump knew of that video and was okay with it.

And it's absurd that I think Trump was winning in 2016 no matter what? Really? Absurd?

Given that he was lucky enough to have an opponent who was also incredibly unpopular and was under active FBI investigation, in addition to writing off huge portions of the Obama coalition in pursuit of Romney voters, yes, it's absurd.

 

[SoRuffShoNuff]

Please God no. I hope he does us all a favor and site it out.

 

[Aerogamer]

Things will be clearer 2018, it has not even been a year since the election. People are way to jumpy, impulsive and cannot really understand all the factors that go into the emergence of candidates. This is no longer a time when the Democratic party has an heir apparent. This is similar to after 2004 than anything else as to where the party is and how a front runner will emerge. Even then, the primaries will be much larger and the candidate will be known in 2020, there will be no upstart, anointed candidate this time.

Also tired of doom and gloom, enthusiasm and confidence is needed, not over confidence mind you, but motivation to take this country back.

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

If you went by under 45, young, and independents? (you know... those who could have won an election against Trump). Of course Bernie was beating Hillary handily in those segments. The 55+ DNC lapdog crowd got their candidate, however...



"But Trump was going to call him a socialist!!!! sudden political DEATH!!" - says every Clinton apologist.

You'd think this stupid straw man would stop existing after the news of the Sanders FBI investigation, but here we are.

 

[eBay Huckster]

... But seriously, what do people see in O'Malley?

people see abs they think they can grind meat on and their minds blank out, i guess

kind of like how people see "i'm going to introduce a medicare for all bill!" and their minds blank out to the fact that the GOP leadership literally will not, and has absolutely no reason to, consider it

 

[Fenderputty]

That pesky democratic block needs to fall in line with what Americans want. Single payer, a solution to student debt, a fair economy that doesn't favor the wealthy, a justice system that doesn't favor the wealthy (and white people), pro-worker anti-corporate legislation and focus... do all of those things and the young, the independent, and workers on either side will give you the win. Once the democratic neoliberal block is FORCED to fall in line (because it WILL be against Trump), you will have 52-55% of the electoral vote on your side.

I feel you. Maybe 8 years of Trump and another 8 of Cruz will solidify our base.

 

[LiK]

Too old

 

[NoblesseOblige]

"But Trump was going to call him a socialist!!!! sudden political DEATH!!" - says every Clinton apologist.

- Crazed Bern-victim.

 

[Lil'DigiOp]

How about we vote for someone I their 40s who has some damn common sense.


Tired of old baby bloomer thinking controlling this country.

These people had their time... it's time for new blood to inherit this society.

I argue the old people fucked this all up in the first place.