Democratic Candidate 2020

[Bewildered]

Here's a bubble plot of the previous chart with size based on state population, because why not

Biden bubble 2.png

is it the radius or the area of the circle that proprtional to the state population?

[El Pollo Diablo]

The area.

[dyqik]

Thanks for the links, woodchopper and Fishnut.

It does seem that "electability" is about all that Biden has going for him, beyond "not being a Republican", and no doubt this has been helped by its being the prevailing media narrative since the race began. The recent polling suggesting that Sanders and Biden are equally electable isn't enough to overcome that.

To me, it does raise the question of "elected to do what?", but I can understand vulnerable people wanting to play it safe. If Biden ends up with the nomination, lets hope the gamble pays off. Democrat voters stayed home in 2016 because they were turned off by Clinton, and in many respects Biden is cut from the same cloth.

Exciting times.

The first thing that the Democratic nominee needs to do is to bring enough support with them in purple and red areas to keep the House and win the Senate back. Otherwise it really doesn't matter who the nominee is, because the GOP stacking of courts means that executive orders will likely get shot down very quickly, and courts will attempt to undo legislation via challenges from the states (see the latest case trying to remove the entirety of Obamacare on a technicality). Legislation will be required, and the confirmation of moderate and left-of-center nominees to run depts. and to the courts.

The first thing an elected Democrat needs to do is to stop making things get worse. That means rebuilding a fair chunk of US institutions to remove the politicization that Trump has put in place, and rebuilding trust in them among Americans generally; removing the effect of the huge number of conservative (and often hideously unqualified) judges that the GOP have put in place; and stopping the assault on rights from GOP led states.

That doesn't preclude doing things that are high priority for the left of the Democratic Party as well, but nominations, rebuilding institutions and appointing judges are a key way to get there as well. And if they don't do the above, then any gains made by a progressive Democratic President won't stick around for very long - they'll get undone as soon as another Tea Party type movement delivers Republicans to power at any level in the system.

[Woodchopper]

Thanks for the links, woodchopper and Fishnut.

It does seem that "electability" is about all that Biden has going for him, beyond "not being a Republican", and no doubt this has been helped by its being the prevailing media narrative since the race began. The recent polling suggesting that Sanders and Biden are equally electable isn't enough to overcome that.

To me, it does raise the question of "elected to do what?", but I can understand vulnerable people wanting to play it safe. If Biden ends up with the nomination, lets hope the gamble pays off. Democrat voters stayed home in 2016 because they were turned off by Clinton, and in many respects Biden is cut from the same cloth.

Exciting times.

The first thing that the Democratic nominee needs to do is to bring enough support with them in purple and red areas to keep the House and win the Senate back. Otherwise it really doesn't matter who the nominee is, because the GOP stacking of courts means that executive orders will likely get shot down very quickly, and courts will attempt to undo legislation via challenges from the states (see the latest case trying to remove the entirety of Obamacare on a technicality). Legislation will be required, and the confirmation of moderate and left-of-center nominees to run depts. and to the courts.

The first thing an elected Democrat needs to do is to stop making things get worse. That means rebuilding a fair chunk of US institutions to remove the politicization that Trump has put in place, and rebuilding trust in them among Americans generally; removing the effect of the huge number of conservative (and often hideously unqualified) judges that the GOP have put in place; and stopping the assault on rights from GOP led states.

That doesn't preclude doing things that are high priority for the left of the Democratic Party as well, but nominations, rebuilding institutions and appointing judges are a key way to get there as well. And if they don't do the above, then any gains made by a progressive Democratic President won't stick around for very long - they'll get undone as soon as another Tea Party type movement delivers Republicans to power at any level in the system.

I agree, and it would be much harder task for a President from outside the party to put together the votes to get legislation passed. The US is very unlike the UK in that respect. The President can't rely upon lobby fodder to do their bidding.

[Bird on a Fire]

Yes, indeed. You can also combine that sentiment with the above mentioned longstanding contact between Biden and African American communities compared to Sanders comparative absence. You don't trust someone who appears to be too radical, and not very interested in you.

Not convinced by the "too radical" part.

Fishnut's piece suggests that black people would prefer Sanders on policy, but are opting for Biden because they think he's more electable. This chimes with the stats you quote* that electability is more important than political position to black voters.

TBH the impression I get is that for most voters Sanders would probably beat Biden in terms of personal preference, but Biden is getting tactical votes based on concerns about Sanders' electability.

*I can't get into WaPo even via incognito mode

[Woodchopper]

Yes, indeed. You can also combine that sentiment with the above mentioned longstanding contact between Biden and African American communities compared to Sanders comparative absence. You don't trust someone who appears to be too radical, and not very interested in you.

Not convinced by the "too radical" part.

Fishnut's piece suggests that black people would prefer Sanders on policy, but are opting for Biden because they think he's more electable. This chimes with the stats you quote* that electability is more important than political position to black voters.

TBH the impression I get is that for most voters Sanders would probably beat Biden in terms of personal preference, but Biden is getting tactical votes based on concerns about Sanders' electability.

I meant too radical for the US electorate as a whole.

*I can't get into WaPo even via incognito mode

Ha, I did

[Fishnut]

Here's a bubble plot of the previous chart with size based on state population, because why not

Biden bubble.png

Anyone know what % overall of Democrat voters are black? I assume its a little over 20% (50% of the population are Demoract, 10% of total population are black but approx. none of them will be Republicans), which suggests Biden could get the nomination. However, I also think we're going to see a big coast-vs-"flyover" split again.

This piece from FiveThirtyEight has some interesting stats.

In 2016, black Americans cast 24 percent of Democratic primary votes — the largest share ever. And in the general election, 89 percent of black voters supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton... But black voters aren’t the monolith exit polls make them out to be. Pew Research Center found that a quarter of black Democrats identify as conservative, and 43 percent identify as moderate.

It also discusses some research that found that black voters switch their affiliation between republican and democrat depending on the race of who's asking.

[Gentleman Jim]

It also discusses some research that found that black voters switch their affiliation between republican and democrat depending on the race of who's asking.

I know Mrs GJimdoesn't switch affiliation just because the candidate is another "Person of Melanation" but has been known to vote for a Republican - at least at state level, because (shock, horror) - she felt they had better policies

[dyqik]

It also discusses some research that found that black voters switch their affiliation between republican and democrat depending on the race of who's asking.

I know Mrs GJimdoesn't switch affiliation just because the candidate is another "Person of Melanation" but has been known to vote for a Republican - at least at state level, because (shock, horror) - she felt they had better policies

It's also the case that a significant number of the (mostly white) people in MA who voted for Elizabeth Warren in 2018 also voted for the Republican Charlie Baker that same year.

[lpm]

Thanks for the links, woodchopper and Fishnut.

It does seem that "electability" is about all that Biden has going for him, beyond "not being a Republican", and no doubt this has been helped by its being the prevailing media narrative since the race began. The recent polling suggesting that Sanders and Biden are equally electable isn't enough to overcome that.

To me, it does raise the question of "elected to do what?", but I can understand vulnerable people wanting to play it safe. If Biden ends up with the nomination, lets hope the gamble pays off. Democrat voters stayed home in 2016 because they were turned off by Clinton, and in many respects Biden is cut from the same cloth.

Exciting times.

The first thing that the Democratic nominee needs to do is to bring enough support with them in purple and red areas to keep the House and win the Senate back. Otherwise it really doesn't matter who the nominee is, because the GOP stacking of courts means that executive orders will likely get shot down very quickly, and courts will attempt to undo legislation via challenges from the states (see the latest case trying to remove the entirety of Obamacare on a technicality). Legislation will be required, and the confirmation of moderate and left-of-center nominees to run depts. and to the courts.

The first thing an elected Democrat needs to do is to stop making things get worse. That means rebuilding a fair chunk of US institutions to remove the politicization that Trump has put in place, and rebuilding trust in them among Americans generally; removing the effect of the huge number of conservative (and often hideously unqualified) judges that the GOP have put in place; and stopping the assault on rights from GOP led states.

That doesn't preclude doing things that are high priority for the left of the Democratic Party as well, but nominations, rebuilding institutions and appointing judges are a key way to get there as well. And if they don't do the above, then any gains made by a progressive Democratic President won't stick around for very long - they'll get undone as soon as another Tea Party type movement delivers Republicans to power at any level in the system.

Yes. And top of the list should be stuff like a national holiday for election day every two years, federal law requiring early voting, automatic voter registration and so on. It's crazy to fight against voter suppression every time, instead of putting in the institutions that will reduce voter suppression.

[lpm]

There's a fairly high chance of Warren (or Bloomberg, but I think he'll fold unless he does astonishingly well tomorrow) going into a contested convention holding the balance of delegates between Biden and Sanders.

Well forecast, dyqik!

He departs and endorses Bernie Sanders. Only joking, he of course endorses Joe Biden:

Three months ago, I entered the race to defeat Donald Trump. Today, I'm leaving for the same reason. Defeating Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. It's clear that is my friend and a great American, Joe Biden.

I'm immensely proud of the campaign we ran. I'm deeply grateful to all the Americans who voted for me, and to our dedicated staff and volunteers. I want you to stay engaged, active, and committed to our issues. I will be right there with you. And together, we will get it done.

[secret squirrel]

Joe Biden. A man whose primary political ambition is to be cordial with Klan members.

[lpm]

Oh, this is a fun game. Let's all play, Putin will thanks us for it.

Bernie Sanders. A man whose primary political ambition is to ship Vermont nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic town in Texas.
Bernie Sanders. A man who supported a Sandinista rally where they chanted death to yankees.
Bernie Sanders. A man who writes fiction about a woman enjoying gang rape.

[secret squirrel]

Oh, this is a fun game. Let's all play, Putin will thanks us for it.

Bernie Sanders. A man whose primary political ambition is to ship Vermont nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic town in Texas.
Bernie Sanders. A man who supported a Sandinista rally where they chanted death to yankees.
Bernie Sanders. A man who writes fiction about a woman enjoying gang rape.

Mine is true though.

[lpm]

Yes, it's true in the sense of "it's a lot more complicated than that and it's not true anyway" kind of a way.

Sadly, my examples are all true in a "lot more complicated than that but really happened" kind of a way.

[lpm]

Poor Donald. He doesn't really know how rich billionaires are, not ever having been one. For him $700 million is a vast fortune, an unimaginable amount to waste.

Mike Bloomberg's wealth increased by $2.5 billion last year. He might only be half a Bezos, but he's still top ten richest in the world.

[dyqik]

There's a fairly high chance of Warren (or Bloomberg, but I think he'll fold unless he does astonishingly well tomorrow) going into a contested convention holding the balance of delegates between Biden and Sanders.

Well forecast, dyqik!

It's not that hard to predict the actions of privileged white men. The question now is whether Bloomberg will support Democrats trying to win back the Senate, or whether he'll fund Republicans running for reelection in tight races in swing states again, boosting Trump's turnout.

[dyqik]

Biden won states where he ran no ads, has no campaign office, and made no appearances.

Also, participation in Democratic primaries is significantly up on 2016, although some of the larger numbers are misleading because it's the first time the state has run a primary rather than a caucus.

[Fishnut]

It also discusses some research that found that black voters switch their affiliation between republican and democrat depending on the race of who's asking.

I know Mrs GJimdoesn't switch affiliation just because the candidate is another "Person of Melanation" but has been known to vote for a Republican - at least at state level, because (shock, horror) - she felt they had better policies

I think, though I may be wrong, that it's saying that if a black person surveys other black people about their voting intentions they get more people saying they're going to vote democrat than if a white person surveys those same black people about their voting intentions, rather than black people don't vote the same every time. The fact the black pollster gets higher democratic figures than both white people and online polls suggests that there's some social pressure to conform to expectations, kind of like those embarrassed tories we kept hearing about in 2017. Black people may be embarrassed to admit they're not voting for the democrats.

[Fishnut]

Bloomberg is out and endorsed Biden on the way.

[Woodchopper]

In terms of key swing states, Sanders won Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire while Biden won Minnesota, North Carolina and Virginia.

That’s three each. But Sanders’ are worth 19 electoral college votes whereas Biden’s are worth 38. It’ll be interesting to see how each fares in Florida and the rust belt states.

[jimbob]

To me, it does raise the question of "elected to do what?", but I can understand vulnerable people wanting to play it safe. If Biden ends up with the nomination, lets hope the gamble pays off. Democrat voters stayed home in 2016 because they were turned off by Clinton, and in many respects Biden is cut from the same cloth.

Exciting times.

Electted to take the power away from the white supremacist POTUS

[Bewildered]

Oh, this is a fun game. Let's all play, Putin will thanks us for it.

Bernie Sanders. A man whose primary political ambition is to ship Vermont nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic town in Texas.
Bernie Sanders. A man who supported a Sandinista rally where they chanted death to yankees.
Bernie Sanders. A man who writes fiction about a woman enjoying gang rape.

Mine is true though.

Well hers seem to be straight up lies that she maybe thinks capture an exaggerated version of his flaws, or something. I have no idea in what sense yours may be true to be honest or what you had in mind behind it. Links may help.

[lpm]

That you've never heard of those 3 demonstrates how other Democrats have never run personal attacks against Sanders.

Clinton was guaranteed to win and needed Bernie-Bro goodwill. Current rivals have also seen a section of voters who mustn't be angered, and have been able to differentiate themselves on policy.

The Republicans pre-prepared attack ads on all 3 events in 2016. After Trump won they boasted to journalists about their file on Sanders.

Other attack lines ready in 2016 included:

- the fiasco of Sanders' Vermont healthcare idea
- his voting against Amber Alerts
- the Jane Sanders incompetence, to be presented as fraud
- the USSR visit
- the video of him saying JFK made him nauseous (the President not the airport!)
- his love for Castro and numerous videos on Cuba

This is going to be a horrifically vicious election. It's spectacularly naive to think the Republicans won't throw everything at him or that everything about him is already known by the general public.

The fact that an idiot on here didn't even bother to Google the 3 examples I gave and just assumed they were lies shows how ill-prepared non-Republicans are for what's to come. Trump & Co are prepared. Is the intention to pretend the attacks are "straight up lies" even though there's video and written records?

[Bewildered]

That you've never heard of those 3 demonstrates how other Democrats have never run personal attacks against Sanders.

Clinton was guaranteed to win and needed Bernie-Bro goodwill. Current rivals have also seen a section of voters who mustn't be angered, and have been able to differentiate themselves on policy.

The Republicans pre-prepared attack ads on all 3 events in 2016. After Trump won they boasted to journalists about their file on Sanders.

Other attack lines ready in 2016 included:

- the fiasco of Sanders' Vermont healthcare idea
- his voting against Amber Alerts
- the Jane Sanders incompetence, to be presented as fraud
- the USSR visit
- the video of him saying JFK made him nauseous (the President not the airport!)
- his love for Castro and numerous videos on Cuba

This is going to be a horrifically vicious election. It's spectacularly naive to think the Republicans won't throw everything at him or that everything about him is already known by the general public.

The fact that an idiot on here didn't even bother to Google the 3 examples I gave and just assumed they were lies shows how ill-prepared non-Republicans are for what's to come. Trump & Co are prepared. Is the intention to pretend the attacks are "straight up lies" even though there's video and written records?

Nope, without links you are a liar.