Why is Warren's campaign tanking all of a sudden?

Author: Imabench ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 71
  • Imabench
    Imabench avatar
    Debates: 5
    Forum posts: 898
    3
    4
    9
    Imabench avatar
    Imabench
    Did i fuckin miss something? I havent really been keeping up on the 'running primary poll' thread cause ive had a lot of shit going on in real life, but checking the usual site I go to it shows Warren has slid down nearly 10 points since mid October where she peaked at almost 27 points.... Ever since, she has slowly been losing fairly noticable chunks of support to Sanders, Biden, and now even Buttigieg based on recent trends, who is now within FIVE POINTS of overtaking Warren in NATIONWIDE polling. 

    Here's how I know something is up: Prior to this point in the race, the only times that Warren ever sank to 15% in national polling were in polls conducted by TheHill/HarrisX, which repeatedly put her at 15% when all other polls had her at least up in the 20's.... Now though, 4 of the last 5 polls have Warren at 15%, and none of them are polls by TheHill/HarrisX..... What the hell caused this though? There hasn't been any massive policy shift on her part that im aware of that could have caused her to lose voters, Sanders Buttigieg and Biden havent really done anything to suddenly sway voters more their way, and the only high profile endorsement (AOC + 'The Squad') that went against Bernie happened a month ago and knocked Warren from 25% to 20%.... Now though she is quickly approaching 15% from November 18th onwards 


    Anyone know anything on this? 



  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 31
    Forum posts: 8,126
    4
    5
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    1.no endorsements
    2.small money
    3.nothing to run on

  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 7,942
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @Dr.Franklin
    She also handled the questions about raising taxes on some of the 43 percenters to pay for Guvt Healthcare poorly.
  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @Imabench
    Overlap with Pete and Biden would be my guess. I don't know what Pete did but he is doing well. It looks more like those supporters went to Biden. As soon as the first dip occurred Biden increased and then Pete is taking people away from Warren and Biden. 
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 7,942
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @TheRealNihilist
    Warren seems like a mix between Biden and Bernie.
  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @Greyparrot
    Warren seems like a mix between Biden and Bernie.
    More Bernie I think. 
  • HistoryBuff
    HistoryBuff avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,310
    3
    3
    2
    HistoryBuff avatar
    HistoryBuff
    In large part it is that she tanked her healthcare plans. Her plan for how to pay for it was obvious political pandering to avoid saying the words "taxes on people will go up". So instead she hid it in a head tax and even on immigration reform. To alot of people, her answers just looked fake. 

    Additionally, her plan on implementing healthcare reform was really stupid. It was essentially to do Butigieg's plan, then 3 years later to try to do sander's plan. It just made no sense to split healthcare reform into 2 separate votes, 1 of which would be after the midterms. There are different opinions on why she would do this, but none of them are good.

    It also doesn't help that the media has been non stop fawning over pete while not even mentioning his massive flaws/outright lies.

    So she is losing upper middle class white supporters to Butigieg and progressives so sanders. 
  • ethang5
    ethang5 avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 4,457
    3
    3
    6
    ethang5 avatar
    ethang5
    --> @HistoryBuff
    It also doesn't help that the media has been non stop fawning over pete...
    Of course. He's gay, so you know, he can have no human faults. And if he did, it would be homophobic to mention them.

    I'm homophobic right now for bringing it up.

  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @ethang5
    You don't understand, lefties are attacking him. The structure works like this:

    Minority socialist -> socialist -> minority capitalist -> capitalist

    Given the socialist is greater than the minority as in Pete they can attack him. 
  • HistoryBuff
    HistoryBuff avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,310
    3
    3
    2
    HistoryBuff avatar
    HistoryBuff
    --> @TheRealNihilist
    I don't care if he is gay. that is neither a selling point nor an issue. I do care that he is a corporatist sellout of a candidate who has little to nothing to offer the country. 
  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @HistoryBuff
    Are you a lefty as in a socialist? 
  • johanpeter
    johanpeter avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2
    0
    0
    3
    johanpeter avatar
    johanpeter
    is it, dont be too in the moment things change there are spikes be patient, for the big picture and its so early you wont even remember this 5 years out if we are still here that is
  • HistoryBuff
    HistoryBuff avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,310
    3
    3
    2
    HistoryBuff avatar
    HistoryBuff
    --> @TheRealNihilist
    Are you a lefty as in a socialist? 
    The definition of socialism is:

    a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

    So no. I do not believe the means of production, distribution and exchange should be owned by the community. But neither does pretty much anyone on the left. That term describes very few people. 
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 7,942
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @HistoryBuff
    That's probably true. Even Democrats don't want to see private insurance gutted.
  • HistoryBuff
    HistoryBuff avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,310
    3
    3
    2
    HistoryBuff avatar
    HistoryBuff
    --> @Greyparrot
    That's probably true. Even Democrats don't want to see private insurance gutted.
    Insurance is, by definition, not a means of production. They do not produce anything. They are a parasite. They take money from people with a promise to pay for things later. Then later, they do everything they can to prevent having to pay it back. 

    They do not add any value. they only absorb money from people and help to drive people into bankruptcy. There is no reason for them to exist.  
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 7,942
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    They produce peace of mind and security.
  • Greyparrot
    Greyparrot avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 7,942
    3
    3
    8
    Greyparrot avatar
    Greyparrot
    --> @HistoryBuff
    They do not add any value. they only absorb money from people and help to drive people into bankruptcy. There is no reason for them to exist.  
    That's the job of the government.
  • HistoryBuff
    HistoryBuff avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,310
    3
    3
    2
    HistoryBuff avatar
    HistoryBuff
    --> @Greyparrot
    They do not add any value. they only absorb money from people and help to drive people into bankruptcy. There is no reason for them to exist.  
    That's the job of the government.

    The government exists to protect and provide services to it's people. Ensuring that every single person has access to healthcare is doing both of those things. 

    They produce peace of mind and security.
    Not for most people. For most people they create insecurity and fear. Fear that they will get sick and not have the money to cover the deductible. Fear they will lose their job and lose their coverage. And since the primary way an insurance company makes money is to avoid paying out whenever possible, they undermine both security and peace of mind. Medicare for all would have no deductible and it can never be taken away, lost or have your claim denied. It is vastly superior at providing security and peace of mind. 
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,651
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    Because the Illuminati can't have such a brilliant politician for the people win.

    Same thing happens with Lib Dem candidate in UK every election. 

    We cannot defeat them, just can hope they learn to respect us slightly.
  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @HistoryBuff
    But neither does pretty much anyone on the left.
    Michael Brooks does. Bernie Sanders heavily implies he or people should want to abolish private insurance and you still haven't answered who you follow on the left. 

  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @HistoryBuff
    They do not produce anything. They are a parasite. They take money from people with a promise to pay for things later. Then later, they do everything they can to prevent having to pay it back.
    This is socialist rhetoric. Do we want to avoid parasites? Yes so we should remove private insurance. That is what you are heavily implying. Insurance is inherently taking something now and promising something later. You can't change that unless you want to remove all insurance and you know only have public healthcare.  
  • HistoryBuff
    HistoryBuff avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 2,310
    3
    3
    2
    HistoryBuff avatar
    HistoryBuff
    --> @TheRealNihilist
    Michael Brooks does. Bernie Sanders heavily implies he or people should want to abolish private insurance and you still haven't answered who you follow on the left. 
    Insurance isn't a means of production. They aren't producing anything. All they do is soak up money and hurt people. 

    This is socialist rhetoric. Do we want to avoid parasites? Yes so we should remove private insurance. That is what you are heavily implying. Insurance is inherently taking something now and promising something later. You can't change that unless you want to remove all insurance and you know only have public healthcare.
    Insurance for things that aren't critical is fine. Car insurance etc. But medical care is something that every single person needs to live. Hiding that behind a massive paywall and greedy corporations should not be permitted. Health insurance companies add no value to anything.  But again, that isn't socialism in the same way it isn't socialism for the government to provide roads or schools. It is a critical service that people need to live. It is no different than what america has been doing for a very long time. 
  • TheRealNihilist
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    Debates: 44
    Forum posts: 4,888
    4
    8
    11
    TheRealNihilist avatar
    TheRealNihilist
    --> @HistoryBuff
    Insurance isn't a means of production.
    Yes it is. A middle man is doing a job facilitating a deal. That is still a production whether you feel like it is or isn't. 
    They aren't producing anything. All they do is soak up money and hurt people. 
    This is the difference between me and you. You have to inject your feelings even though the other person is trying not to be emotional. 
    But medical care is something that every single person needs to live.
    Fully able 18-24 year olds?
    Hiding that behind a massive paywall
    Under capitalism if there was such a barrier to entry that was impacting enough customers they would have to reduce their prices. If they don't they lose out on potential profit which can lead to eventually shutting down for not meeting profit margins.
    greedy corporations should not be permitted. 
    Emotional yet again. Community and corporation are the same thing. 
    Health insurance companies add no value to anything.
    They do deals when other people cannot.
    But again, that isn't socialism in the same way it isn't socialism for the government to provide roads or schools.
    It is more socialist than it is capitalist. It doesn't have to be a socialist state in order to have socialist esc ideas.
    It is no different than what america has been doing for a very long time. 
    Appeal to tradition. 
  • SirAnonymous
    SirAnonymous avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 2,224
    3
    6
    10
    SirAnonymous avatar
    SirAnonymous
    It also didn't help that she announced that her Medicare for All plan would cost $52 trillion dollars in ten years when the previous estimates had been $32 trillion. Somehow, telling people that your plan is 62.5 percent more expensive than anticipated doesn't go over well, especially when it cost $32 trillion to begin with.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,651
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @SirAnonymous
    Do ou know how huge the US is? Try providing healthcare (mental healthcare too) at a price that will properly provide for those in the nation that need it. Stoo criticising a genuine effort to make US finally join other deceloped and civilised nations in giving healthcare to its financially vulnerable..