Politics 2020 Field - DNC

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Bullock and Sestak both out in the last couple of days. Now we see who their 0% support moves to!

barfo
 
I'd hate to have to vote for Joe but if it's necessary I will. The best candidates in my view can't win this election so it's a lot like the last election except I won't vote a third party ticket this time.
 
EL PRESIDENTE said:
Click to expand...


Good

Harris ran as long as she could. She simply doesn't have the support and wasn't going to be the nominee anyway. It will be interesting to see which way her supporters go now that she is out.
 
Chris Craig said:
Good

Harris ran as long as she could. She simply doesn't have the support and wasn't going to be the nominee anyway. It will be interesting to see which way her supporters go now that she is out.
Click to expand...
She flip flopped to much! Imo
 
I see Amy picking up some of Harris support. She’s more middle and reasonable in her message and she has been very consistent from day one.
 
Hoopguru said:
I see Amy picking up some of Harris support. She’s more middle and reasonable in her message and she has been very consistent from day one.
Click to expand...
I also think she would out debate Trump as she’s quick in her feet, can be aggressive, very smart, rubs well with people and has proven winning track record.
 
With the candidates beginning to dwindle I’m honestly wondering how much longer until the mainstream media starts smearing Bernie. Surely he will morph into a Russian agent in the coming months as his numbers rise.
 
jonnyboy said:
With the candidates beginning to dwindle I’m honestly wondering how much longer until the mainstream media starts smearing Bernie. Surely he will morph into a Russian agent in the coming months as his numbers rise.
Click to expand...

His numbers are going to rise?

barfo
 
Hoopguru said:
I see Amy picking up some of Harris support. She’s more middle and reasonable in her message and she has been very consistent from day one.
Click to expand...



barfo
 
I’m guessing Amy out debates EW next debate.
Her message is more palatable imo.
 
yankeesince59 said:
Umm, did I say that?...was Paul Allen ever POTUS?...do you have a legitimate point?...do you ever?
Click to expand...

You're implying that a billionaire utilizing the legal remedy of bankruptcy to protect a business from failing, keeping employees employed, is despicable.

I am just pointing out that Paul Allen is despicable by your definition.

Would you want Paul Allen as POTUS, or was he too dishonest and corrupt? :dunno:
 
MARIS61 said:
You're implying that a billionaire utilizing the legal remedy of bankruptcy to protect a business from failing, keeping employees employed, is despicable.

I am just pointing out that Paul Allen is despicable by your definition.

Would you want Paul Allen as POTUS, or was he too dishonest and corrupt? :dunno:
Click to expand...

No, I didn't "imply" anything...instead, you evidently "inferred" incorrectly...learn the difference between the two terms.
 
Kamala finally realized nobody buys her act.

So that's like 5 swamprat dropouts:politician::politician::politician::politician::politician:, but 3 new billionaires throw their hats into the heap this week? :smiley-sir::smiley-sir::smiley-sir:
 
The world's richest racist is convinced he can buy a new image with his billions:

Bloomberg rolls out more than $57M in TV ads in first weeks of campaign
By Sam Dorman | Fox News

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has only been in the 2020 race for two weeks, and already he's spending more than the Trump campaign and leading Democrats.

According to Advertising Analytics, Bloomberg's campaign had spent more than $57.5 million on TV ads, more than three times the spend of the Trump Make America Great Again Committee ($19 million). The pro-Trump committee was followed by South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg at $15.6 million and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. at $14 million.

Bloomberg narrowly trailed fellow billionaire Tom Steyer, who had spent nearly $60.2 million on ads.

CNBC reported that Bloomberg's ad spending included $6 million in national television spots, more than $4 million in Texas ads, and $3 million focused on New York and Los Angeles.

Trump's campaign, which already has the full support from the Republican Party, has been working with the Republican National Committee to raise a record amount of funds -- amassing an enormous war chest against whoever the Democratic nominee will be.

Bloomberg entered the 2020 presidential race relatively late and needs to make gains in the polls if he wants to keep up with the party's frontrunners.

Bloomberg's investment was the most any candidate ever spent in a single week of advertising, according to Advertising Analytics. And according to market research data, Bloomberg's ads ran 19,006 times between Nov. 23 and Dec. 1.

The massive amount of spending will likely intensify progressive attacks on the former mayor.

Sanders has already accused Bloomberg of trying to "buy this election." Fellow progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., similarly attacked the billionaire turned presidential candidate.

Prominent Sanders supporter Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., appeared to accuse Bloomberg of trying to "purchase our political system" at a recent rally in Iowa.

"There are folks that are trying to completely purchase our political system, running as Republicans and now tossing in their hats as Democrats in the field as well," she said.

"But what we're here to say is that in a democracy, it shouldn't matter how much money you have. What should matter is whether you vote, whether you caucus, whether you turn out. It's the numbers. It's the people. it's the movement."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bloomberg-tv-ads-57-million
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top