Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 268: Hope & Change

(+) Yeah! (+)

Rip

---

Warren's problem was she caved to the relentless media pressure to explain how she was going to pay for M4A without raising middle-class taxes. Once she did is right where her poll surge stopped and went on a nosedive as it opened her up to more attacks on the specifics.

Sanders has continued to be evasive on that, including in the last debate when they tried to do the same to him, to his benefit. Though he also hasn't faced the same sustained campaign by debate moderators on it that Warren did.

among other problems she faced of course but seriously line up the timelines here

---

xp1337 posted...

Warren's problem was she caved to the relentless media pressure to explain how she was going to pay for M4A without raising middle-class taxes. Once she did is right where her poll surge stopped and went on a nosedive as it opened her up to more attacks on the specifics.

Sanders has continued to be evasive on that, including in the last debate when they tried to do the same to him, to his benefit. Though he also hasn't faced the same sustained campaign by debate moderators on it that Warren did.

among other problems she faced of course but seriously line up the timelines here

I was one of the people who said she should explain it and I guess I was wrong. Its dumb because being vague shouldnt win you points, but I guess it does.

---

People are looking almost purely at electablility for votes. Anything you provide specifics on becomes open for attacks because answers become all the more complicated. also people in general are stupid and arent going to understand your talking points when you get to specifics.

---

You are vague because you don't know the true cost until you actually sit down and work out the details. Which will be bipartisan and involve members of both sides of Congress. He has mentioned many new taxes, but at the end of the day he doesn't have a total because he can't. Simple.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

You are vague because you don't know the true cost until you actually sit down and work out the details. Which will be bipartisan and involve members of both sides of Congress. He has mentioned many new taxes, but at the end of the day he doesn't have a total because he can't. Simple.

I mean, he doesn't need a total because the bill is just DoA for at least 3 years.

---

red13n posted...

I mean, he doesn't need a total because the bill is just DoA for at least 3 years.

Parts of it can be executive action'd but yeah m4a is going to be a fight for sure.

---

Even Bill Barrs INCREDIBLY MILD criticism of the President for making his job harder is enough for him to be ostracized by the Cult of Trump

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1228111943954784256?s=21
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Even Bill Barrs INCREDIBLY MILD criticism of the President for making his job harder is enough for him to be ostracized by the Cult of Trump

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1228111943954784256?s=21

Lmao
Its not even real criticism, its shut up youre making us get caught

---

If we can't impeach Barr, maybe we can spin his mild criticism enough to anger Trump enough to just fire him!

---

Trump inevitably replaces everyone he fires with someone worse.

---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

If we can't impeach Barr, maybe we can spin his mild criticism enough to anger Trump enough to just fire him!

You ready for Attorney General Roger Stone?

Because that's how you get AG Stone.

---

red13n posted...

Trump inevitably replaces everyone he fires with someone worse.

SOMEONE has to be the worst person alive. We just have to get him there
---

https://twitter.com/hunterw/status/1228088113848897536

---

Jakyl25 posted...

SOMEONE has to be the worst person alive. We just have to get him there

Trump himself? That is a very dangerous path. It's what the Roman Republic did and what led to the collapse of the republican system - all of the high offices of state were concentrated in one man. Legally, there's no reason we can't do the same thing - Trump can be President, Chief (and sole) Justice of the Supreme Court, Senate Majority Leader, and Speaker of the House, at the same time. As well as director of the FBI, CIA, NSA, whatever, and Secretary of Education, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, etc.

---

I think Trump cannot be both President and Vice President because of the requirement that they need to be residents of different states. Although Trump could probably argue that for purposes of his being President, he is from New York and for purposes of being Vice President, he is from Florida.

---

Iowa is the 'gift' that keeps on giving

Georgia poll:

https://twitter.com/NilesGApol/status/1228094077268307969

Biden: 32% (-9)
Sanders: 14% (+6)
Bloomberg: 14% (+14)
Buttigieg: 5% (-)
Warren: 4% (-13)
Klobuchar: 3% (+2)
Steyer: 2% (+2)

Biden loses a lot of ground but still dominates

Go AWAY Bloomberg

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Iowa is the 'gift' that keeps on giving

Georgia poll:

https://twitter.com/NilesGApol/status/1228094077268307969

Biden: 32% (-9)
Sanders: 14% (+6)
Bloomberg: 14% (+14)
Buttigieg: 5% (-)
Warren: 4% (-13)
Klobuchar: 3% (+2)
Steyer: 2% (+2)

Biden loses a lot of ground but still dominates

Go AWAY Bloomberg

This is basically why I dont think Biden is dead (though obviously things are going to be more difficult than he would have hoped).

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Iowa is the 'gift' that keeps on giving

Georgia poll:

https://twitter.com/NilesGApol/status/1228094077268307969

Biden: 32% (-9)
Sanders: 14% (+6)
Bloomberg: 14% (+14)
Buttigieg: 5% (-)
Warren: 4% (-13)
Klobuchar: 3% (+2)
Steyer: 2% (+2)

Biden loses a lot of ground but still dominates

Go AWAY Bloomberg

Am I correct that if this is the actual result, Biden gets 100% of the Georgia delegates because all of the others are below the 15% cutoff?

---

Biden isn't dead, although I think his BEST chance is to get 2nd place in delegates and then have Bernie get primary'd out

Which is a nuclear situation for the Democratic party as a whole but they'd totally do it

---

red sox 777 posted...

Am I correct that if this is the actual result, Biden gets 100% of the Georgia delegates because all of the others are below the 15% cutoff?

Arent some of the delegates given on a district by district basis? Presumably there would be places where Bernie and Bloomberg are above 15 and places where theyre below.

---

But yeah Biden isn't dead. Winning big in the South allows one to really win a lot of delegates. There's a lot of population in the South, while there isn't in Iowa and New Hampshire. It was so depressing seeing Bernie get a lead of like 2 delegates against Hillary from crushing in NH last time only to be blown out of the water for the delegate lead in SC.

---

If Biden has a great showing in SC, he's in it for the long haul. Sweeping all of the southern states while Bernie struggles to get above 30% anywhere is no joke. There is a legitimate reality where Biden wins a plurality of delegates exclusively through dominance in former slave states.

---

https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1228088976483012620

This doesn't actually matter, but I feel like it's important to remind myself every now and then that people like this really do exist and sometimes the strawmen are just...men

---

Disgusting:

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1228116855195414530?s=21

---

Oh another fun fact: no majority has taken the lead in 538s model

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Even Bill Barrs INCREDIBLY MILD criticism of the President for making his job harder is enough for him to be ostracized by the Cult of Trump

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1228111943954784256?s=21

I was gonna say reminds me of JOHN BOLTON, TOOL FOR THE LEFT and then I remembered that was from Lou Dobbs too

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh another fun fact: no majority has taken the lead in 538s model

I am ready for chaos.

---

Trump was enraged when DoJ decided not to charge Comey (because, of course, there was no case):

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1228139662516137990?s=21

I dont understand how anybody can brush this authoritarian shit off as no big deal.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I dont understand how anybody can brush this authoritarian shit off as no big deal.

Hint: It's because they like authoritarianism.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Trump was enraged when DoJ decided not to charge Comey (because, of course, there was no case):

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1228139662516137990?s=21

I dont understand how anybody can brush this authoritarian shit off as no big deal.

It's not authoritarian if the cabal of conspirators around Hillary, Comey, etc. are actually guilty.

---

red sox 777 posted...

It's not authoritarian if the cabal of conspirators around Hillary, Comey, etc. are actually guilty.

The DoJ looked into both Comey and Clinton, the latter multiple times (and its bad enough that they were directed to do that), and concluded that there was no case that wouldnt be laughed out of court. Trump is furious that they wouldnt proceed anyway.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

I am ready for chaos.

Actual chaos leads to certain victory for Trump

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The DoJ looked into both Comey and Clinton, the latter multiple times (and its bad enough that they were directed to do that), and concluded that there was no case that wouldnt be laughed out of court. Trump is furious that they wouldnt proceed anyway.

Trump is entitled to disagree with that opinion and bring his case to a court, and potentially a jury if it gets past dismissal. But it seems he ended up listening to advice and not prosecuting where he would likely lose. (Unlike the Democrats who prosecuted a case they knew was 99%+ going to result in acquittal).

---

No he isnt

The President is not supposed to personally decide who to prosecute. Thats exactly what Im calling authoritarian shit.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

No he isnt

The President is not supposed to personally decide who to prosecute. Thats exactly what Im calling authoritarian shit.

His oath of office requires him to faithfully execute the laws of the USA. If he was investigating his opponents for parking tickets, and wasn't giving his personal attention to such matters from others, sure, that would be an abuse of power. But rampant corruption by a leader of a major party, the FBI director, etc.? That's something I would say the president almost has an obligation to look into.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

I am ready for chaos.

*chuckles*
You mean the Chaos Emeralds?

---

If you say the President can't investigate the other party then surely the other party, if they control the House, cannot investigate the President.

---

red sox 777 posted...

If you say the President can't investigate the other party then surely the other party, if they control the House, cannot investigate the President.

Impeachment is inherently a political process. Importantly, the punishment is political (removal from office), not criminal (going to jail). Ive said multiple times in this topic series that any future criminal investigation of Trump (which should happen because he did commit crimes) should absolutely not be directed by the president.

---

xp1337 posted...

*chuckles*
You mean the Chaos Emeralds?

Gotta vote fast!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Impeachment is inherently a political process. Importantly, the punishment is political (removal from office), not criminal (going to jail). Ive said multiple times in this topic series that any future criminal investigation of Trump (which should happen because he did commit crimes) should absolutely not be directed by the president.

Then who should it be directed by? The unelected bureaucrats at the DOJ? What if they are corrupt? Who can investigate them? Who can hold them to account?

The President is always accountable to the voters. Allowing people to have absolute power with no accountability would transform our republic into a dictatorship. There has to be a mechanism to remove a corrupt attorney general/FBI director.

---

Game theory wise, there is a strong motive for all presidents/political leaders not to investigate each other. Because if there is a custom that past presidents do not get indicted, then you are safe after leaving office. I don't think Xi Jinping has abrogated this custom in China yet - that past heads of state have unofficial immunity from prosecution.

For Trump to campaign on a platform of "drain the swamp" was personally extremely risky for him, because if we remove the customary immunity the swamp of government had been conferring on itself - then we remove the barrier to Trump being prosecuted by a future administration.

---

LotM, I say this in all kindness: what is wrong with you?

---

Suprak the Stud posted...

LotM, I say this in all kindness: what is wrong with you?

He's a centrist.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Oh another fun fact: no majority has taken the lead in 538s model

Hillary Clinton's nomination odds are looking VERY tempting right now. Might put some action on that.

---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Hillary Clinton's nomination odds are looking VERY tempting right now. Might put some action on that.

I think John Kerry called dibs.

---

Polls are gonna be a mess with a Coronavirus quarantine and outbreak going on in November.

---

I assume this would benefit Trump because it would depress the popular vote and the "educated" won't turn out to vote.

Or would it hurt Trump more because conspiracy theorists are more likely to be republican and the older are more affected by the virus.

Time will tell.

---

I think Democrats are more likely to vote by mail, so it would hurt Republicans.

---

https://mobile.twitter.com/deep_beige/status/1228119011973586944

Read the comment chain.

---