OT Why Never Trumpers Should Bet on DeSantis Now

[crandc]

If you go by popular vote, she did beat Trump. European democracies can't understand the weird American system where twice in 30 years the candidate with fewer votes becomes president.

Anyway.

We all, well most, agree Trump is evil. Please, can we not forever relitigate 2016?

 

[Phatguysrule]

If you go by popular vote, she did beat Trump. European democracies can't understand the weird American system where twice in 30 years the candidate with fewer votes becomes president.

Anyway.

We all, well most, agree Trump is evil. Please, can we not forever relitigate 2016?

Unfortunately, 2016 was a opportunity to shine. The Dems used that opportunity to look no less corrupt than the republicans, and they will be paying for that for a long time. We all will be. It's not something we can just forget. We should remember it. Democrats should remember it and try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Unfortunately it doesn't appear they see it that way.

 

[Phatguysrule]

You are talking about superdelegates, I think. That system was in place before Bernie entered the race. The superdelegates had a right to support whoever they wanted, and they also were going to be asked who they supported, obviously. And they (not surprisingly, or corruptly) supported Hillary. So yeah, she had a big advantage, because she had done what was necessary to gain the support of the superdelegates. And Bernie had not.



None of that amounted to much, other than the usual effect of political endorsements.



Right. The election is rigged if my guy doesn't win! Where have we heard that before?



Somebody's candidate necessarily always loses in the primaries. It's up to the losing candidates and their voters whether they want to be sore losers or not.

barfo

Lol. Okay. And democrats just keep losing ground for no reason.

Everyone but the 30% who vote D no matter what are just SORE LOSERS.

Like I said, tribal politics at its finest.

 

[barfo]

Lol. Okay. And democrats just keep losing ground for no reason.

Everyone but the 30% who vote D no matter what are just SORE LOSERS.

Like I said, tribal politics at its finest.

I'm not sure the democrats are losing ground. Seems to me Hillary got more votes than Trump, and Biden got more votes and more electoral votes than Trump.

No, not everyone is a sore loser. But if you are mad that your preferred candidate didn't win the primary and that influences your choice among the remaining candidates in the general, then yes, you might be a sore loser.

I liked Bernie. I would have happily voted for him in the general if he'd won the primaries. But he didn't. And it wasn't some giant conspiracy. He simply got fewer votes. He either didn't have enough supporters or they didn't all vote. He got 13 million votes, in a country of 350 million people. That wasn't enough to win.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

I'm not sure the democrats are losing ground. Seems to me Hillary got more votes than Trump, and Biden got more votes and more electoral votes than Trump.

No, not everyone is a sore loser. But if you are mad that your preferred candidate didn't win the primary and that influences your choice among the remaining candidates in the general, then yes, you might be a sore loser.

I liked Bernie. I would have happily voted for him in the general if he'd won the primaries. But he didn't. And it wasn't some giant conspiracy. He simply got fewer votes. He either didn't have enough supporters or they didn't all vote. He got 13 million votes, in a country of 350 million people. That wasn't enough to win.

barfo

Right. They were completely unbiased. Guess that's why they changed the rules on the superdelegates. In fact, I guess they aren't even called superdelegates anymore... ?

Then there was this thing... Brazile: Leaking town hall topics to Clinton campaign 'mistake I will forever regret'. Yeah, she was upset that she got caught in that one.

I guess there really is no need for campaign finance reform either in your opinion then? Campaign contributions are just speech after all... and corporations are just people... it's not like it's a conspiracy or anything. It's the way our corrupt leaders wrote the rules, so probably not worth discussing, right? Anyway...

Nobody was talking about people who were just mad about Bernie. We were talking about people who were angry about the actions of Hillary and by extension, the DNC/Democratic Party, since it was being run by her campaign at the time. Those kinds of improprieties and the extreme hubris she displays so often (leading to the frequent failures) are why people hate Hillary more than Joe Biden.

Most people who didn't vote for Hillary didn't vote for her for those reasons. Not because they were mad about Bernie.

We're days away from having a republican governor of Oregon. Bernie won the Oregon vote over Hillary. Dems don't seem to be gaining ground...

 

[barfo]

Right. They were completely unbiased. Guess that's why they changed the rules on the superdelegates. In fact, I guess they aren't even called superdelegates anymore... ?

I didn't say they were unbiased. Delegates make a choice among the candidates, that's kind of the entire point of being a delegate.

And yes, the party realized that superdelegates weren't a great idea, which they weren't. But they were the system at the time, the system Bernie decided to compete in.

Then there was this thing... Brazile: Leaking town hall topics to Clinton campaign 'mistake I will forever regret'. Yeah, she was upset that she got caught in that one.

Donna Brazile is a moron, but really, how many votes do you think that changed? 4 million?

I guess there really is no need for campaign finance reform either in your opinion then? Campaign contributions are just speech after all... and corporations are just people... it's not like it's a conspiracy or anything. It's the way our corrupt leaders wrote the rules, so probably not worth discussing, right? Anyway...

Campaign reform would be great. But was Bernie strapped for money? I seem to remember him being pretty good at fundraising.

We're days away from having a republican governor of Oregon. Bernie won the Oregon vote over Hillary. Dems don't seem to be gaining ground...

I don't think the one has much to do with the other. Primary presidential vs gubernatorial general?

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

I didn't say they were unbiased. Delegates make a choice among the candidates, that's kind of the entire point of being a delegate.

Nobody blamed the delegates. Only how they were used by the DNC and the media.

And yes, the party realized that superdelegates weren't a great idea, which they weren't. But they were the system at the time, the system Bernie decided to compete in.

And again, the DNC and media abused that system, largely due to Clinton's influence, which is why the Sanders insisted that the rules were changed.

Donna Brazile is a moron, but really, how many votes do you think that changed? 4 million?

This has cost the democrats a lot of support. Even today. It may have been the needle that gave us Haystack Trump.

Campaign reform would be great. But was Bernie strapped for money? I seem to remember him being pretty good at fundraising.

That wasn't the point. The point was in response to your "conspiracy" comment. It's not considered a big conspiracy that corporations literally buy votes. But it happens, and it's wrong, and it's incredibly harmful. But it's the system we have.

If it's legitimate to debate campaign finance reform and the reasons to do it then why not Dem Primary reform and the reasons to do it?

I don't think the one has much to do with the other. Primary presidential vs gubernatorial general?

You don't think national politics impacts local politics? Really?

 

[Chris Craig]

Right. They were completely unbiased. Guess that's why they changed the rules on the superdelegates. In fact, I guess they aren't even called superdelegates anymore... ?

Then there was this thing... Brazile: Leaking town hall topics to Clinton campaign 'mistake I will forever regret'. Yeah, she was upset that she got caught in that one.

I guess there really is no need for campaign finance reform either in your opinion then? Campaign contributions are just speech after all... and corporations are just people... it's not like it's a conspiracy or anything. It's the way our corrupt leaders wrote the rules, so probably not worth discussing, right? Anyway...

Nobody was talking about people who were just mad about Bernie. We were talking about people who were angry about the actions of Hillary and by extension, the DNC/Democratic Party, since it was being run by her campaign at the time. Those kinds of improprieties and the extreme hubris she displays so often (leading to the frequent failures) are why people hate Hillary more than Joe Biden.

Most people who didn't vote for Hillary didn't vote for her for those reasons. Not because they were mad about Bernie.

We're days away from having a republican governor of Oregon. Bernie won the Oregon vote over Hillary. Dems don't seem to be gaining ground...

Not really conspiracy if it's out in the open.

Not getting the town hall questions in advance didn't hurt Bernie. That guy can talk and pull answers out of the air.

Yes, we need campaign finance reform. We have millionaires funding for their own campaigns and getting reimbursed for it. We need to equalize campaigning.

The Democrat party screwed over Bernie I agree. They wanted the more moderate Hillary. They didn't want to go further left with the right going as far right as possible already. They wanted to run someone safe and known. They fucked up. They screwed themselves. Bernie would have likely beat Trump. More people would have shown to vote if he was the candidate.

 

[barfo]

Nobody blamed the delegates. Only how they were used by the DNC and the media.


And again, the DNC and media abused that system, largely due to Clinton's influence, which is why the Sanders insisted that the rules were changed.

In what way did they abuse the superdelegates? Do you think the superdelegates should not have been permitted to say who they favored?
I could see how that would be a better arrangement, but I don't think it was 'abuse' to poll the superdelegates, any more than it is 'abuse' to poll regular voters.

This has cost the democrats a lot of support. Even today. It may have been the needle that gave us Haystack Trump.

I'm not sure that metaphor is great, but in any case there were lots of needles. DNC, Russia, Comey/"her emails", poor staffing, overoptimism, bad campaign decisions, bad polling, etc.
It was a very close thing and changing any of those things might have put her over the top.

That wasn't the point. The point was in response to your "conspiracy" comment. It's not considered a big conspiracy that corporations literally buy votes. But it happens, and it's wrong, and it's incredibly harmful. But it's the system we have.

If it's legitimate to debate campaign finance reform and the reasons to do it then why not Dem Primary reform and the reasons to do it?

Totally legitimate to debate reforming the Dem primaries! I'm all for it. The debate and also the reform.

You don't think national politics impacts local politics? Really?

I just don't see how DNC fuckups in the 2016 election would cause Bernie voters in Oregon to vote for a more conservative candidate than Tina Kotek. Just not following that line of thinking.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

In what way did they abuse the superdelegates? Do you think the superdelegates should not have been permitted to say who they favored?
I could see how that would be a better arrangement, but I don't think it was 'abuse' to poll the superdelegates, any more than it is 'abuse' to poll regular voters.

It wasn't reported or portrayed that way. As a result people didn't understand that it was a poll. They thought they were already counted.

I'm not sure that metaphor is great, but in any case there were lots of needles. DNC, Russia, Comey/"her emails", poor staffing, overoptimism, bad campaign decisions, bad polling, etc.
It was a very close thing and changing any of those things might have put her over the top.

It was a terrible metaphor... I was thinking about the straw that broke the camel's back and said something completely different. Missed a perfect opportunity for a fat Cheeto joke...

Totally legitimate to debate reforming the Dem primaries! I'm all for it. The debate and also the reform.

Excellent!

I just don't see how DNC fuckups in the 2016 election would cause Bernie voters in Oregon to vote for a more conservative candidate than Tina Kotek. Just not following that line of thinking.

barfo

We were discussing a trend... Those fuckups started the trend and democrats have just been pouring more fuel on that fire.

 

[Lanny]

The only thing we know for sure is that Hillary didn't beat Trump. All else is speculation. There are many reason why she didn't win but at the end of the day it is on the democrats for not delivering. Hillary also got the candidate she wanted, part of her strategy was that "no one would really vote for Trump, right?".

We don't know what the Russians had in store for Bernie either, so saying he was the weaker candidate because of some mystery documents is not a great argument. Besides other than being a socialist there just isn't a lot of dirt on Bernie, and he is a self described socialist so I would be interested to see what the Russians would do. Just look how much emotion there is on this topic 6 years later, I feel Hillary's biggest mistake was not reaching out to progressives once she crushed them. I know lots of people who were very not excited to vote for her.

I hate to say this but that's not entirely true. Hillary won the popular vote count by six Million votes. Trump won the election by an unfair and antiquated Electoral College fluke.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Not really conspiracy if it's out in the open.

Not getting the town hall questions in advance didn't hurt Bernie. That guy can talk and pull answers out of the air.

Yes, we need campaign finance reform. We have millionaires funding for their own campaigns and getting reimbursed for it. We need to equalize campaigning.

The Democrat party screwed over Bernie I agree. They wanted the more moderate Hillary. They didn't want to go further left with the right going as far right as possible already. They wanted to run someone safe and known. They fucked up. They screwed themselves. Bernie would have likely beat Trump. More people would have shown to vote if he was the candidate.

And that's all I'm saying. It's something the Dems are still paying for. That cronyism turned off a lot of people who supported Obama. And the Dems have only doubled down on that.

It's disheartening to say the least.

I've done my part by voting for Kotek. But I wish Dems would stop trying to run off the people who support them...

 

[Phatguysrule]

I hate to say this but that's not entirely true. Hillary won the popular vote count by six Million votes. Trump won the election by an unfair and antiquated Electoral College fluke.

That's not going to change though. It's important to play by the rules you have rather than the rules you want but will never get.

It would take a constitutional amendment to change that and that's never going to happen. And it certainly won't happen if we keep letting Republicans gain more ground.

 

[Chris Craig]

And that's all I'm saying. It's something the Dems are still paying for. That cronyism turned off a lot of people who supported Obama. And the Dems have only doubled down on that.

It's disheartening to say the least.

I've done my part by voting for Kotek. But I wish Dems would stop trying to run off the people who support them...

The Democratic Party needs to stop going with status quo candidates. Our fathers and mothers politicians are no longer on par with an ever evolving way of life and a newer generation of voters.

Progress requires change. The answer to a far far right Trump should have been a somewhat far left Bernie. No one wants status quo. Change is going to happen one way or the other. Trump happened mostly because Bernie didn't.

Is there a path where Hillary without Benghazi and an investigation open against her days before the election by the FBI could have won? Maybe.

Did Bernie stand the better chance. Yes. The DNC did not want to move farther left. It wanted to stay moderate...status quo. It didn't work.

 

[Phatguysrule]

The Democratic Party needs to stop going with status quo candidates. Our fathers and mothers politicians are no longer on par with an ever evolving way of life and a newer generation of voters.

Agree 100%
Unfortunately those are the people in power, and our system is set up to keep them there.

 

[Chris Craig]

And that's all I'm saying. It's something the Dems are still paying for. That cronyism turned off a lot of people who supported Obama. And the Dems have only doubled down on that.

It's disheartening to say the least.

I've done my part by voting for Kotek. But I wish Dems would stop trying to run off the people who support them...

I don't know that they are purposefully running off people who support them. I think they have become out of touch with what the voters want. We need Ingenuity...new ideas and ways of doing things. Not the same ole same ole.

 

[Chris Craig]

Agree 100%
Unfortunately those are the people in power, and our system is set up to keep them there.

Yeah, we need term limits in Congress and the Senate.

 

[Lanny]

Yeah, we need term limits in Congress and the Senate.

I don't want anyone telling me who I can't vote for who is otherwise qualified.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Yeah, we need term limits in Congress and the Senate.

I go back and forth on this. There are so few good ones... I wonder if preventing them from running would make things worse....

 

[julius]

I don't want anyone telling me who I can't vote for who is otherwise qualified.

Then you agree that the age limit for President should be removed?

 

[Chris Craig]

I go back and forth on this. There are so few good ones... I wonder if preventing them from running would make things worse....

Sure, there are. The problem is we need new blood. New ideas. When it's the same people for forty years, it's the same policies and ideas. There is no change and little progression. Times are changing. We need representatives that reflect that.

There are people who have been in office since before I was born. People are staying in office for fifty years till they die in their eighties or nineties. It's like...retire and enjoy yourself a bit while you can. Let someone else come in.

They have some pretty amazing retirement packages after leaving office. Lifetime pension and healthcare. Why don't they use them. I guess they are just addicted to the power. Not a good thing.

 

[ABM]

I guess they are just addicted to the power. Not a good thing.

Welcome to the Pelosi & McConnell show.

 

[Chris Craig]

Welcome to the Pelosi & McConnell show.

Yeah, two examples of people who should have long since retired. The dude from Alaska was in office even longer or just as long and died in his eighties, still I'm office.

 

[crandc]

I also go back and forth. I mean, what if constituents really like their representative?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I also go back and forth. I mean, what if constituents really like their representative?

Then said representative should be prepared to mentor a suitable replacement.

 

[barfo]

What we need is better voters.

The ones we have now are fucking idiots.

barfo

 

[Lanny]

Then you agree that the age limit for President should be removed?

What gave you that idea?
I said I wanted to vote for whoever I wanted provided they were otherwise qualified.

 

[Phatguysrule]

What we need is better voters.

The ones we have now are fucking idiots.

barfo

Everyone, quick, go buy an AR!

 

[julius]

What gave you that idea?
I said I wanted to vote for whoever I wanted provided they were otherwise qualified.

Why can't someone who is under 35 be qualified

 

[Chris Craig]

Why can't someone who is under 35 be qualified

You are pretty much guaranteed to be mature by then if you can be.

It's interesting cause 35 was like 50 back then.