|
Post by finsobruce on Aug 9, 2019 14:27:38 GMT
This on top of a long line of mistakes to date I don't think Biden is going to win anymore. Despite his poll lead. bit.ly/2GZodTAI agree. As others drop out I don't see many transferring to him. I hope that's the case. I think he would be a disastrous candidate Bluntly Biden is in the lead because he is the best known and has sort of done the job already.
Once the field whittles down the dynamic will change quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by London Lad on Aug 9, 2019 14:36:26 GMT
This on top of a long line of mistakes to date I don't think Biden is going to win anymore. Despite his poll lead. bit.ly/2GZodTAI agree. As others drop out I don't see many transferring to him. I hope that's the case. I think he would be a disastrous candidate How many times has been (and failed) a candidate now? - seems to be a permanent fixture in Dem presidential races without ever seeming to get anywhere. I think the big problem this time is his age.
|
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 22,395
|
Post by mboy on Aug 9, 2019 15:35:15 GMT
This on top of a long line of mistakes to date I don't think Biden is going to win anymore. Despite his poll lead. bit.ly/2GZodTAWhat's truly bizarre is that anyone gives a toss about an obvious slip of the tongue in the context of competing against Donald Trump. Anyone remember when Hillary Clinton lied through her teeth about "landing under sniper fire" in Bosnia? Yeeeeeh, we remember that... it was a footnote in her 2008 campaign that didn't budge the polls or voters at all. But a slip of the tongue is somehow a big deal? Well, the USA gets the politicians it deserves, in my view. If anyone other than Biden had said this no one would care.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Aug 9, 2019 15:50:04 GMT
This on top of a long line of mistakes to date I don't think Biden is going to win anymore. Despite his poll lead. bit.ly/2GZodTAOdd that The Standard seem more shocked and outraged than the American media online who are barely mentioning it, and when they do say that he simply muffed a line from his regular stump speech. Looks like George and his colleagues at The Standard are spending too much time reading Trump’s Twitter feed rather than researching a story.
|
|
mondialito
Labour
Everything is horribly, brutally possible.
Posts: 4,924
|
Post by mondialito on Aug 9, 2019 16:21:59 GMT
I don't think this on its own will derail Biden, but it will be used in the primary to make him out to be not as sharp as one needs to be to beat Trump, particularly in debates. While there is still a long way to go until February, I'm getting the sense it will be between Harris and Warren for the nomination.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Aug 9, 2019 16:48:52 GMT
I don't think this on its own will derail Biden, but it will be used in the primary to make him out to be not as sharp as one needs to be to beat Trump, particularly in debates. While there is still a long way to go until February, I'm getting the sense it will be between Harris and Warren for the nomination. Harris won’t survive beyond South Carolina unless she ups her performance numbers amongst African American voters. Barring a real unforeseen circumstance this is going down to Biden and Warren, with Sanders refusing to accept the obvious and hanging around right until the end.
|
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 22,395
|
Post by mboy on Aug 9, 2019 19:16:11 GMT
I agree it will be between Warren and Biden now, and the longer Bernie hangs around the more he hurts Warren I suspect.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Aug 10, 2019 9:45:56 GMT
It is a mistake to assume that Warren and Sanders supporters are likely to move in a largely uniform manner. While they are ideologically similar they are drawing from very different demographics and on that count a lot of Sanders supporters look more like potential Biden voters than Warren voters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 15:48:10 GMT
Biden benefits from split opposition. When it's whittled down to 2 or 3 candidates watch his lead crumble.
|
|
myth11
Non-Aligned
too busy at work!
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by myth11 on Aug 10, 2019 16:14:22 GMT
PR plus the fact Superdelegates votes only count on the 2nd ballot of contested convention likely means a long battle for the Democratic Party.
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Aug 10, 2019 17:26:42 GMT
Biden benefits from split opposition. When it's whittled down to 2 or 3 candidates watch his lead crumble. Many, myself included, said the same about Trump.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Aug 10, 2019 18:32:27 GMT
Biden benefits from split opposition. When it's whittled down to 2 or 3 candidates watch his lead crumble. To me Biden benefits from a smaller field; Bullock, Inslee, Klobuchar, Ryan, Delaney, even Gillibrand are running as centrists/slightly left of center, but on things like Medicare reform and the Green New Deal (Inslee excluded whose ploughing his own furrow) all are closer to Biden than to Sanders and Warren, so to the extent they can control their supporters they’re far more likely to back Biden (assuming he still appears competent) than Warren. They’ll be acutely aware of the potential harmful impact of Trump throwing “socialism” at every Democrat at every level, but the one person who can use a 40+ year record rebutting that is Biden.
|
|
nelson
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by nelson on Aug 10, 2019 21:32:15 GMT
Biden benefits from split opposition. When it's whittled down to 2 or 3 candidates watch his lead crumble. To me Biden benefits from a smaller field; Bullock, Inslee, Klobuchar, Ryan, Delaney, even Gillibrand are running as centrists/slightly left of center, but on things like Medicare reform and the Green New Deal (Inslee excluded whose ploughing his own furrow) all are closer to Biden than to Sanders and Warren, so to the extent they can control their supporters they’re far more likely to back Biden (assuming he still appears competent) than Warren. They’ll be acutely aware of the potential harmful impact of Trump throwing “socialism” at every Democrat at every level, but the one person who can use a 40+ year record rebutting that is Biden. None of these people are relevant, Klobuchar is polling at 1% on average and the others lower. Outside of the five leading candidates (Biden, Warren, Sanders, Harris and Mayor Pete) only Beto and Booker at 2% each on average matter.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Aug 10, 2019 21:53:21 GMT
To me Biden benefits from a smaller field; Bullock, Inslee, Klobuchar, Ryan, Delaney, even Gillibrand are running as centrists/slightly left of center, but on things like Medicare reform and the Green New Deal (Inslee excluded whose ploughing his own furrow) all are closer to Biden than to Sanders and Warren, so to the extent they can control their supporters they’re far more likely to back Biden (assuming he still appears competent) than Warren. They’ll be acutely aware of the potential harmful impact of Trump throwing “socialism” at every Democrat at every level, but the one person who can use a 40+ year record rebutting that is Biden. None of these people are relevant, Klobuchar is polling at 1% on average and the others lower. Outside of the five leading candidates (Biden, Warren, Sanders, Harris and Mayor Pete) only Beto and Booker at 2% each on average matter. That makes the mistake of using national polling figures when it’s States that matter (ask Hillary) and we’ve seen very few State polls outside of Iowa. They’re also important because delegates are awarded proportionally, including by Congressional District, so even so somebody’s polling 1% nationally they could have pockets of support to deliver delegates from individual Congressional districts (Gillibrand for example could deliver more of upstate New York where she served in the House than de Blasio who’s wildly unpopular outside New York City (and arguably not that popular in it)).
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Aug 10, 2019 23:41:18 GMT
Biden will lose to Trump because under the avuncular bluster, he's an incompetent with nothing to offer. I do hope they won't be stupid enough to select two duds in a row
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,541
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Aug 11, 2019 1:31:44 GMT
Biden will lose to Trump because under the avuncular bluster, he's an incompetent with nothing to offer. I do hope they won't be stupid enough to select two duds in a row He's got a much wider potential voter coalition compared to Trump and, to he frank, just had to play it safe to win. Biden isn't incompetent, he's just a little erratic. Nevertheless, he's a consummate Washington pro who can make things happen that Trump can only dream of.
|
|
nelson
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by nelson on Aug 11, 2019 2:06:03 GMT
None of these people are relevant, Klobuchar is polling at 1% on average and the others lower. Outside of the five leading candidates (Biden, Warren, Sanders, Harris and Mayor Pete) only Beto and Booker at 2% each on average matter. That makes the mistake of using national polling figures when it’s States that matter (ask Hillary) and we’ve seen very few State polls outside of Iowa. They’re also important because delegates are awarded proportionally, including by Congressional District, so even so somebody’s polling 1% nationally they could have pockets of support to deliver delegates from individual Congressional districts (Gillibrand for example could deliver more of upstate New York where she served in the House than de Blasio who’s wildly unpopular outside New York City (and arguably not that popular in it)). They won't have the necessary funds to compete and will be out of the race after Super Tuesday at the latest, and they simply don't have many votes to pass on to Biden, which is what we were talking about. You can't attract enough donors if you aren't competitive nationally and you can't run a campaign without adequate funds. The NY primary is on April 28, Gillibrand and de Blasio will almost certainly both be out by then.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Aug 11, 2019 2:19:22 GMT
That makes the mistake of using national polling figures when it’s States that matter (ask Hillary) and we’ve seen very few State polls outside of Iowa. They’re also important because delegates are awarded proportionally, including by Congressional District, so even so somebody’s polling 1% nationally they could have pockets of support to deliver delegates from individual Congressional districts (Gillibrand for example could deliver more of upstate New York where she served in the House than de Blasio who’s wildly unpopular outside New York City (and arguably not that popular in it)). They won't have the necessary funds to compete and will be out of the race after Super Tuesday at the latest, and they simply don't have many votes to pass on to Biden, which is what we were talking about. You can't attract enough donors if you aren't competitive nationally and you can't run a campaign without adequate funds. The NY primary is on April 28, Gillibrand and de Blasio will almost certainly both be out by then. Yes but they will have people who are supporting them today who will then have to transfer their allegiances elsewhere, and again, although they’re polling at miniscule levels nationally, and in Iowa which remains the only State to be have multiple polls by credible polling organisations thus far, there will be pockets of support, particularly at House District level, elsewhere that’s enough to deliver the delegates for that District to their anointed second choice. Most States are not operating a winner takes all system this year, so potentially every percentage once you’ve crossed 15% can earn you a delegate Statewide and at District level. One of the potential problems for Sanders is that in national polls he’s trailing Warren, Biden and Harris as Democrats second choice. One other omission so far is that there have been a couple of polls of African American voters, specifically in South Carolina, but next to nothing of Hispanic voters, including according to Jon Ralston midweek no polling in Nevada, the fourth State, and a predominantly Hispanic Democratic electorate.
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Aug 11, 2019 5:47:06 GMT
Biden will lose to Trump because under the avuncular bluster, he's an incompetent with nothing to offer. I do hope they won't be stupid enough to select two duds in a row He's got a much wider potential voter coalition compared to Trump and, to he frank, just had to play it safe to win. Biden isn't incompetent, he's just a little erratic. Nevertheless, he's a consummate Washington pro who can make things happen that Trump can only dream of. Biden as VP pick, then runs for POTUS in 2028?
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Aug 11, 2019 8:48:34 GMT
Biden will lose to Trump because under the avuncular bluster, he's an incompetent with nothing to offer. I do hope they won't be stupid enough to select two duds in a row He's got a much wider potential voter coalition compared to Trump and, to he frank, just had to play it safe to win. Biden isn't incompetent, he's just a little erratic. Nevertheless, he's a consummate Washington pro who can make things happen that Trump can only dream of. Consummate Washington pro. The three words ecapsualting why he won't be elected if they select him. Just too establishment.
|
|