Running Primary Poll Thread

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

09.28.2019 10:22PM

-->

@Greyparrot

This is the same guy who thinks that Warren supporters aren't real progressives and are just kidding themselves.

I still catch myself believing that what Bernie did in 2016 to the party is what Palin helped do with the GOP in 2008 =Try to appeal to the more radical aspect of the party and weaponize it to increase turnout in the hopes that it will return them to power but ultimately cause fissures within the base that start to fracture things instead..... It's not a perfect comparison, but I think its still happening (fractures within the party), just not to the point that there are full-blown factions seceding from central party authority like with what the Freedom Caucus tried to pull off a few times around 2012-2015

Part of me kind of hope the fracturing in both parties keeps happening though. It will be shitty and lead to nothing getting done a lot of the time at first, but If the ultra conservative wing of the GOP breaks off, and the ultra liberal faction of the Democrats break off, it could cause a possible middle-moderate centralized parties to form and reconfigure the two-party system the US has suffered through for centuries.... That could then pry open the door for rank voting in presidential elections where people can list candidates in order of preference, and really change things for the better.... A 3 or 4 party system divided by how much people value government intervention into economic affairs or personal liberties would strike the ideal balance between best representation and cohesiveness to act together in true times of crisis.

Topic's author

#152

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

09.28.2019 10:26PM

-->

@Greyparrot

Found it

"Warren's base is largely white, upper middle class people. They don't want to see massive change. They like warren because she will make some improvements but, ultimately, will leave intact the corrupt system those upper middle class white people benefit from..... Real progressives don't like Warren. Warren's white, upper middle class base don't like sanders"

It's going to be really entertaining to see which base of Warren or Sanders supporters flings the most shit at the other candidate but then has to try to justify an about-face when one of those two drops out and then goes up against Biden for the remainder of the primary.... It's pretty quiet for now since the upper candidates have mainly just been playing defense against smaller candidates with 0 chance of actually gaining the nomination, but when we get to the point where theres only 4 or 5 candidates left, shit is going to get HEATED.

#153

Debates: 567

Posts: 19,930

09.28.2019 10:41PM

-->

@Imabench

Wrong. Real Progressives like Warren and don't like Sanders. Real Communists like Sanders but hate Warren for being 'fake'.

Progressivism is closest to Warren's background and outlook. Full-on Communism is closest to Sanders.

Socialism is to a society what Communism is to a community. Until there's anarchy, Communism takes the form of Socialism. The idea is the same; make everyone equal.

I am a real Progressive, but not a Socialist or Communist.

#154

Debates: 4

Posts: 23,201

09.28.2019 11:10PM

-->

@Imabench

Real progressives don't like Warren.

Chilling.

Topic's author

#155

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2321/running-primary-poll-thread?page=6&post_number=134

09.28.2019 11:14PM

Oh that wasnt me saying something I believe in, I was just repeating what HistoryBuff said, in response to a point Greyparrot made

Post 134 is where its from

Topic's author

#156

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

09.28.2019 11:16PM

-->

@HistoryBuff

RM blocked me so I cant tag him in my response, but I think he wants to discuss your previous claim that real progressives don't like Warren and are essentially fake.

Post 153, just a bit higher up, have fun.

#157

Debates: 4

Posts: 23,201

09.28.2019 11:32PM

-->

@Imabench

I'm just curious where these "not real" progressives are going to go once they are kicked out of the Democrat Party...

#158

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 12:30AM

-->

@RationalMadman

I am a real Progressive, but not a Socialist or Communist.

You already live in a socialist society. Canada, the UK, Germany, Denmark etc are all socialist societies. Sanders' ideas are no further left than moderate parties in any of those countries. Sanders has literally no communist plans.

Progressivism is closest to Warren's background and outlook.

Warren was a republican until a few years ago. She wants to put patches on the broken parts of the system. That is definitely an improvement. But she doesn't want to actually fix the broken system. She is more progressive than the other candidates, but that really isn't saying all that much. The majority of the people running in the dem leadership debate would be right at home as moderate republicans. Warren would be a huge step forward from the rest of the field. Sanders is another step forward from Warren.

I'm just curious where these "not real" progressives are going to go once they are kicked out of the Democrat Party

Who said anything about kicking them out? A moderate progressive would be much more at home with sanders' policies than they would with the republicans.

#159

Debates: 567

Posts: 19,930

09.29.2019 12:31AM

-->

@HistoryBuff

No they are not. They are Social Democracies that lean more towards Capitalism than towards Socialism.

#160

Debates: 567

Posts: 19,930

09.29.2019 12:32AM

-->

@HistoryBuff

The fact Warren jumped Parties at the sake of her own political prowess speaks volumes for her integrity. She saw the corruption within them and moral reprehensiveness in their outlook and changed allegiances due to that. Her career stagnated and took heavy hits due to this jump, it's by a lot of luck that she's ended up where she is, more so than any overall strategy.

#161

Debates: 567

Posts: 19,930

09.29.2019 12:33AM

-->

@HistoryBuff

Sanders identifies as a Democratic Socialist. His ideas are the most appealing to Communists out of all prominent candidates in both this and last election. That is the point I was making.

Topic's author

#162

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

09.29.2019 12:35AM

-->

@Greyparrot

If we're lucky enough, the more radical ones will move further to the left at a faster race then the rest who are closer to the center, and splinter themselves off into their own corner where they can have their own coalition/party that is well defined but still too small to do anything.

A far left party, a sort of left party, a sort of right party, and a far right party.... That would be the ideal result in my book where the two minority radical parties at both extremes remind the larger more moderate parties that theyre not crazy and incentivize collaboration

#163

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 12:49AM

-->

@RationalMadman

No they are not. They are Social Democracies that lean more towards Capitalism than towards Socialism.

Did I miss an announcement from sanders where he said he would abolish capitalism? Can you name any policies of Sanders that are communist? Can you name any that wouldn't be considered normal in Canada?

The fact Warren jumped Parties at the sake of her own political prowess speaks volumes for her integrity.

It means she has some integrity, that is true. However she was a registered republican until 1996. She was 47 years old and still a conservative. That should put up some serious concerns for anyone who is a progressive.

Sanders identifies as a Democratic Socialist. His ideas are the most appealing to Communists out of all prominent candidates

Sander's is the furthest left. So of course communists would like him better. But that doesn't mean he is a communist. It just means he is slightly closer to their ideology than the others. But he is still a long way away from it.

If we're lucky enough, the more radical ones will move further to the left at a faster race then the rest who are closer to the center, and splinter themselves off into their own corner

Nah, if we are lucky, people will realize that they are all further left than they thought they were. If you ask someone if they are left leaning, alot of people will say no. But if you ask them what they think of left leaning plans without telling them they are left, they like them. The issue is that the language has been highjacked. Right wing people have convinced others that they are actually the center and everyone else needs to be like them. They have been able to paint reformers as crazy communists so they can keep their corrupt broken system. Bill clinton and the dems that followed turned the democratic party into a party that did the same things as the republicans, just with less bible thumping and racism.

#164

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

09.29.2019 01:38AM

-->

@bmdrocks21

In your poll, the national average of polls showed Hillary winning by 3%.

Where did you get that from?

The swing states are named that for a reason. They can go either way. 3% is laughable number to the number of swing states that I mentioned in my forum post. Please tell me where you got that number from what I think was limited viewing of the polling data I gave.

My point is the polls aren't always to be trusted. Especially this far out.

Trump shouldn't always be trusted. Especially this far out.

The Bible shouldn't always be trusted. Especially having no evidence for the resurrection of Jesus.

Do you have a comment to my replicas of your comments?

#165

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 01:46AM

-->

@HistoryBuff

Exactly which candidate would be welcomed into the Republican party?

#166

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 01:51AM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

What is "this far out" have to do with trusting Trump? That makes no sense. My comment makes sense regarding polls since most people haven't tuned in yet. We don't know if people will refuse to vote Democrat if their candidate doesn't make it. A candidate could take a bad stance and screw up. A million different things could happen, and the polls aren't as relevant over a year from the election.

Do you have any comment to my comments?

#167

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 01:52AM

-->

@Imabench

Could you see any moderate Democrats flipping votes if Warren or Sanders gets the nomination?

#168

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

09.29.2019 02:11AM

-->

@bmdrocks21

What is "this far out" have to do with trusting Trump? That makes no sense.

If you actually read the question I gave you would understand what I was referring too. Did you read that before typing this?

My comment makes sense regarding polls since most people haven't tuned in yet.

You have yet to demonstrate polling numbers to be false so this "most people haven't tuned in yet." doesn't matter until you actually have a case for polling numbers being incorrect.

We don't know if people will refuse to vote Democrat if their candidate doesn't make it.

What is this the ultimate skeptic approach? Instead of actually arguing against my point you go to well we can't know really. I would've thought I would be more inclined to we can't really know anything for sure then a Christian but oh well.

A candidate could take a bad stance and screw up.

Even if we compare Hillary to Trump. Trump had more blunders and worse scandals but he won. Your point here is invalid and still invalid when we see the blunders of Biden and gotcha by people like Kamala Harris in the first democratic debate didn't drop his position as the person on top.

A million different things could happen, and the polls aren't as relevant over a year from the election.

Please apply this to something else. When I drop a coin it will fall to the ground below. If we take your position we would be unsure of the result and throwing the very idea of cause and effect out of the window. Your point here goes against a very fundamental thing. It is really weird how anti-intellectual you become when you can't actually provide valid criticism instead resort to weird claims against cause and effect and an ultimate skeptic approach which I find lacking when defending people you hold dear. It is almost as if you have two different standards to how you critique the sides. Democrats : Find anything to resorting to questioning them. Republicans : Find the best interpretation of what they have done.

Do you have any comment to my comments?

Yes. Too bad you didn't actually understand what my question was about and didn't even mention it instead, simply copy it for your own means. My question helped my arguments. Yours shows you like parroting what I do badly by not incorporating that into your response.

#169

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 02:14AM

-->

@bmdrocks21

Exactly which candidate would be welcomed into the Republican party?

I didn't mean they would be welcomed. I apologize for being unclear. I meant that their political positions would fit in as a moderate republican. This obviously doesn't include the current nomination cycle as they all started pretending to be further left than they actually are.

People like Biden, Beto, buttigieg, klobuchar. Hell, a large chunk of Obama's policies were right out of a republican playbook too. I mean obamacare was a plan originally pushed by the heritage foundation and was supported by republicans, until obama suggested it. At that point the right wing plan became communism somehow.

Until now, what republicans called "the left" was actually just the slightly more moderate right. Sanders and Warren are the only ones running that are actually on the left. Maybe yang too, but he has some weird libertarian stuff thrown in as well.

Topic's author

#170

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

09.29.2019 03:05AM

-->

@bmdrocks21

I actually just had a convo abut this with a bunch of guys I know in Law School at the University of Miami who im in a fantasy football group with.

Consensus among all of us (approx 8) was that a Warren nomination wouldn't really push people out of the party or to the GOP, but that Sanders might. While both of them are pretty similar in terms of politics and policies, Warren seems to present herself and conduct herself in a more reasonable fashion, while Sanders only has ever sounded like a loud radical.....

Basically people could forget Warren is pretty leftist, but Bernie would be a constant reminder, which could push people out of the party

#171

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 03:11AM

-->

@Imabench

Basically people could forget Warren is pretty leftist

It remains to be seen if she actually is. She was right wing until the last decade or so. She has taken alot of bernie's ideas, watered them down and presented them as her "plans". But since she is already courting the party establishment (which as I have explained are essentially moderate right wing people). I would say the odds are pretty good that she is pretending to be left to win the primary, but will then shift right and disappoint everyone just like Obama did.

That is why it is so important that Sanders wins. Because if they run another hope and change campaign and then do nothing, they will screw themselves for years. And then you will get even more chaos.

#172

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 04:32AM

-->

@HistoryBuff

You know, you might be almost right about them being similar to moderate Republicans. I'd say they would be the liberal faction. Not that they should be in the party at all. Just the fact that you have a bunch of stupid neo-cons mixed in with the actual conservatives. So, by default.... maybe?

#173

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 04:32AM

-->

@HistoryBuff

But that would also mean I could put neo-cons in your party.

#174

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 03:36PM

-->

@bmdrocks21

But that would also mean I could put neo-cons in your party.

I can't pin down what exactly what domestic policies would constitute a neo-con. The term mostly seems to describe their foreign policy (ie starting wars and bombing as many people as possible).

Starting wars is not a left wing ideology. Neither is it a right wing ideology. I would say if your primary position in politics is that your country should get in more wars, I think all political parties should reject you.

#175

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 03:59PM

-->

@HistoryBuff

They are for corporate welfare, as well. That is central planning, therefore left-wing. They also support the modern welfare state. I hate them a lot -_-

They share some ideas with you like inheritance taxes and the progressive income tax. They share a couple with us as well.

#176

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 04:07PM

-->

@bmdrocks21

They are for corporate welfare, as well. That is central planning, therefore left-wing.

At this point left and right wing are not useful terms. Neo-cons are such a mishmash of terrible policies pulled from all over the place, I'm not sure how a simplistic scale like left vs right could describe them.

#177

Debates: 6

Posts: 2,798

09.29.2019 04:15PM

-->

@HistoryBuff

Hey, at least we can agree they are garbage :)

Yes, they are a mashup of left and right policies. They don't belong anywhere.

#178

Debates: 0

Posts: 3,901

09.29.2019 05:03PM

-->

@bmdrocks21

I think for people like neo-libs and neo-cons, the better label is corporatist. They don't care about right wing or left wing ideology. They care about making the rich richer and helping their corporate donors get away with anything, as long as the campaign donations flow in.

If that means using public money to bail out private companies, using the power of government to protect specific companies that fund them etc. they are all for it.

These people all need to be run out of office.

15 days later

Topic's author

#179

Debates: 6

Posts: 934

10.15.2019 02:25PM

Sorry I havent posted in here in a while, there was a good week or so without any solid poll updates and the main poll I do like to use (Economist/YouGov) has been rather erratic recently with 6 point swings for Biden and Warren on a weekly basis. Now that we've got a new batch we can dissect things a bit:

1 - Warren now regularly polling in the 20% range

Apart from one poll on 10/7 that has Warren at 15% (Which is almost certainly horse shit and I'm not even a big Warren fan) Warren now regularly is polling in the 20% range averaging 23% to 27%. RCP has her average at 23.4% but thats because the bs 15% poll is warping the numbers lower then what they are. With Biden polling back and forth between 25% and 31%, Warren's stronger polling places her within spitting distance of Biden at second place. Bernie meanwhile is lagging at a now distant third place, polling between 13% and 16% a full 10 points behind Warren now.

A quick glance at the overall trends show that when Harris bit off a lot of Biden's support following the first debate performance, those former Biden supporters have since gravitated towards Warren's camp rather then back to Biden. This is evidenced by Harris's decline since the debate (exactly 10.0% since July 4th) while Biden's numbers have been about the same since the same date (27% to 29%).... That 10% Harris lost that Biden never regained can clearly be seen being absorbed by Warren, who since July 4th has seen her numbers increase by almost that exact margin (+9.9% since July 4th).

2 - It's possible that Biden's remaining supporters are his core base that will be difficult for him to lose

The transition of the voter bloc that went from Biden to Harris following the first debate, and then from Harris to Warren ever since lends credence to a theory that those voters were wavering Biden supporters who were waiting to jump ship to a different candidate the first chance they got. Harris following her strong performance in the first debate, began to rival both Warren and Sanders in polling where all candidates were around 13% to 15%. With Harris not being as far to the left as Warren or Sanders though, Biden voters who were itching for another more moderate candidate to back switched from Biden to Harris and then migrated over to the Warren camp rather then back to Biden

This all entirely theoretical though. It's equally possible that there are still wavering Biden supporters who are willing to jump ship but just werent impressed with Kamala Harris following her performance in the first debate. Maybe they would back Buttigieg or Beto O'Rourke if they suddenly surged in the polls or had strong debate performances. It's worth noting though that even if this were the case, the distance between Biden and the rest of the more moderate candidates still in the race is oceanic in size..... Buttigieg and Harris are around 5% in support well outside of the top tier of candidates in the race, while others like Beto or even Andrew Yang poll closer to 3% and are in even worse shape. Booker, Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard, and Castro all struggle to get north of 1% in the same. This means that the chances of one of these more moderate candidates surging in polls by a large enough margin to make Biden supporters completely reconsider their support is almost impossible, indicating the remaining 25% or so that supports Biden will likely remain with him through the remainder of the race, or even grow once the lesser moderate/centrist candidates begin to drop out.

Topic's author

#180

Debates: 6

Posts: 934