Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 274: Rebuttigieg

(+) Yeah! (+)

KamikazePotato posted...

Lots of good South Carolina Biden polls coming out. Averages out to about a +12 lead over Sanders according to 538.

Yeah he may be able to consolidate the moderate lane just in time before Super Tuesday.

The big question mark is how attached are Bloomberg voters, many of them were Biden voters that recently jumped ship

---

'Lanes' don't really exist to the degree people think they do.

https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/

According to this, the second choice for each candidate is:

Sanders Supporters
-Warren 29%
-Biden 24%
-Bloomberg 15%

Bloomberg Supporters
-Biden 28%
-Sanders 20%
-Pete 20%
-Warren 10%
-Amy 10%

Biden Supporters
-Sanders 33%
-Bloomberg 24%
-Warren 14%

Pete Supporters
-Bloomberg 22%
-Amy 22%
-Sanders 20%

Warren Supporters
-Sanders 38%
-Amy 15%
-Pete 14%
-Biden 14%

Those numbers are all over the place and show significant overlap between all the candidates. Yes, somewhat more of the Bloomberg voters prefer Biden over Sanders, but it's not nearly to the degree people make it out to be. Turns out Moderate Voltron doesn't actually exist!

In fact, I'll be direct: at this point, the stacked field of moderates hurts Sanders. It helped him stand out early on, but at this point it just makes it difficult for him to get a majority of delegates simply because there are so many candidates taking a piece of the pie.

---

Thats not clear at all. Even if correlations between candidates were completely nonexistent, the 15% threshold gives the frontrunner (Sanders) a huge advantage that he wouldnt have 1v1. Sanders realistically could, for example, be the only candidate viable statewide in CA.

---

Pete's Bloomberg & Amy fallbacks having twice the support of Sanders ones doesn't prove what you think it does. >_>

The calculation is incredibly fuzzy for sure so it's right to counter those pushing for The Iowa Blob as a significant win for moderates, but denying the split at all is just going to the opposite extreme conclusion. Those numbers aren't "all over the place" by any means.

---

You guys should just switch to FPTP. After South Carolina, we would be at:

Sanders - 10
Biden - 9
Buttigieg - 6
Others - 0

Now wouldn't that be exciting?

---

red sox 777 posted...

You guys should just switch to FPTP. After South Carolina, we would be at:

Sanders - 10
Biden - 9
Buttigieg - 6
Others - 0

Now wouldn't that be exciting?

Bernie won Iowa though


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Bernie won Iowa though

If Iowa wants to district itself into districts, I don't see a problem with that.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Thats not clear at all. Even if correlations between candidates were completely nonexistent, the 15% threshold gives the frontrunner (Sanders) a huge advantage that he wouldnt have 1v1. Sanders realistically could, for example, be the only candidate viable statewide in CA.

On the other hand, having so many candidates still around could keep Sanders from breaking 15% in South Carolina, leaving Biden as the sole candidate viable statewide. If that happens, the resulting media coverage is really going to hurt Sanders.
---

Grimlyn posted...

Pete's Bloomberg & Amy fallbacks having twice the support of Sanders ones doesn't prove what you think it does. >_>

Why are you arbitrarily grouping Bloomberg and Amy together?

---

Also, without sarcasm: we're fucked

https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1233149899446857729

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/02/27/us-workers-without-protective-gear-assisted-coronavirus-evacuees-hhs-whistleblower-says/

Officials at the Department of Health and Human Services sent more than a dozen workers to receive the first Americans evacuated from Wuhan, China, the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, without proper training for infection control or appropriate protective gear, according to a whistleblower complaint.

The workers did not show symptoms of infection and were not tested for the virus, according to lawyers for the whistleblower, a senior HHS official based in Washington who oversees workers at the Administration for Children and Families, a unit within HHS.

The whistleblower is seeking federal protection, alleging she was unfairly and improperly reassigned after raising concerns about the safety of these workers to HHS officials, including those within the office of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar. She was told Feb. 19 that if she does not accept the new position in 15 days, which is March 5, she would be terminated.

The whistleblower has decades of experience in the field, received two HHS department awards from Azar last year and has received the highest performance evaluations, her lawyers said.

The complaint was filed Wednesday with the Office of the Special Counsel, an independent federal watchdog agency. The whistleblowers lawyers provided a copy of a redacted 24-page complaint to The Washington Post. A spokesman for the Office of the Special Counsel said he could not comment on complaints filed with the office.

---

So the official opinion from the very top of the US government is that it will take a miracle for the coronavirus to dissappear.

Leafeon13N posted...

So the official opinion from the very top of the US government is that it will take a miracle for the coronavirus to dissappear.

I thought it was that we just had to wait until April when it gets hotter.

---

Leafeon13N posted...

So the official opinion from the very top of the US government is that it will take a miracle for the coronavirus to dissappear.

Pray the plague away

---

Some good news:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/27/cdc-to-test-more-suspected-cases-of-coronavirus-after-revising-guidelines.html

---

The Trump administration's decisions with regards to Covid19 (having government workers with no protection tending to patients and bringing patients to the continental US) might have led to GDC getting downsized or cancelled this year, and I'm mad about it.

UC Davis, the location of the patient with no connection to China, is located in northern California, right near some treatment centers with government workers who weren't given proper protection.

GDC is also located in Northern California.

In response to the news of the patient so close to the conference, several companies pulled out of GDC, including Microsoft, Epic, Sony, and others (there are definitely some companies that dropped out quietly without making a public announcement).

I follow the former director of GDC on twitter, Meggan Scavio, and from what she's saying GDC isn't prepared for something like this, cause they just never expected it. In the 30ish year history of GDC, nothing on this scale has come up.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Without reading this, I just want to say that of course it was not THE factor. It was just the last factor that tipped the election that should not have been that close in the first place due to other factors, many of which were unforced errors by Hillary

And yet Trump is apparently the most unstoppable politician of all time that could never be defeated.

Even though a rather poorly run campaign from an incredibly unpopular candidate would have beaten him had it not been for last minute FBI interference.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

And yet Trump is apparently the most unstoppable politician of all time that could never be defeated.

Even though a rather poorly run campaign from an incredibly unpopular candidate would have beaten him had it not been for last minute FBI interference.

He was stoppable in 2016. He was an unproven challenger then. Now he is an incumbent, presiding over a very strong economy.

---

He also went from a party outsider who many big name republicans said they would never support, to the face of the party who going against means you are a traitor and should be kicked out of the party.

---

Also, Trump's campaign was tailored for Hillary. He could afford to be incredibly unpopular because he knew his opponent was even more hated. Trump won a very substantial, probably record-breaking number of votes from people who disapproved of him and thought he was unfit to be president.

As Trump said, if the circumstances were different, his campaign would have been different. If the election was decided by the popular vote he would have campaigned hard in New York, for instance. And we aren't talking cosmetic changes, but changes going back to the beginning of the campaign that would have made him a very different candidate.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

And yet Trump is apparently the most unstoppable politician of all time that could never be defeated.

Even though a rather poorly run campaign from an incredibly unpopular candidate would have beaten him had it not been for last minute FBI interference.

So you're saying Bernie would have won.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

had it not been for last minute FBI interference.

Again democratic apologist theory.

---

Hot take: Trump and Clinton were both medium strength politicians electability wise

I'm absolutely convinced that Hillary would have smoked Rubio or Cruz.

---

Polls continue to come in, all reinforcing the notion that Biden wins SC by around 15-20%. Bernie should still be viable to receive delegates which is crucial - if he can manage that, it doesn't look nearly as bad. This gives Biden a momentum boost going into Super Tuesday.

One X-factor that will hurt him on ST that isn't being talked about a lot is that his campaign, at the moment, is dead. If he doesn't get last-minute support (from whatever source) he literally cannot continue to run ads or organize rallies or...whatever. On the flip side, Sanders' donations continue to surge and he has plenty of money to throw around, and his advertising in ST states has been MUCH higher than Biden's.

At the moment I think that, when the dust clears, the final delegate count for all states ends up being something like Sanders 38% and Biden 29%. Not enough that the DNC can't afford to make the case for primarying him out...but enough that if they do that it would look TERRIBLE.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Hot take: Trump and Clinton were both medium strength politicians electability wise

I'm absolutely convinced that Hillary would have smoked Rubio or Cruz.

Oh absolutely. They would have gotten crushed.

---

Trump was a weakish candidate who got lucky. He's...still a weakish candidate who may once again get lucky, because unfortunately the Electoral map still looks questionable. I think Sanders annihilates him with the popular vote, moreso than Hillary did, but if we get something like Sanders with 5 million votes in the lead and Trump still winning the EC then society is proper fucked even more than it already is.

---

This is my new favorite 'lol media' image of this election cycle. Love the synergy with their motto at the top.

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Polls continue to come in, all reinforcing the notion that Biden wins SC by around 15-20%. Bernie should still be viable to receive delegates which is crucial - if he can manage that, it doesn't look nearly as bad. This gives Biden a momentum boost going into Super Tuesday.

One X-factor that will hurt him on ST that isn't being talked about a lot is that his campaign, at the moment, is dead. If he doesn't get last-minute support (from whatever source) he literally cannot continue to run ads or organize rallies or...whatever. On the flip side, Sanders' donations continue to surge and he has plenty of money to throw around, and his advertising in ST states has been MUCH higher than Biden's.

At the moment I think that, when the dust clears, the final delegate count for all states ends up being something like Sanders 38% and Biden 29%. Not enough that the DNC can't afford to make the case for primarying him out...but enough that if they do that it would look TERRIBLE.

yeah, it seems like a lot of biden's donors are maxed out and he has to find new ones. apparently he has *one* campaign office in california (compared to sander's and bloomberg each with over 20). maybe he should have taken less private jets!

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/27/opinion/bernie-sanders.html



Based, couldnt ask for a better endorsement

---

KamikazePotato posted...

In fact, I'll be direct: at this point, the stacked field of moderates hurts Sanders. It helped him stand out early on, but at this point it just makes it difficult for him to get a majority of delegates simply because there are so many candidates taking a piece of the pie.

I disagree because the viability threshold is such that outside Biden and Buttigieg... they really aren't taking pieces of the pie. Sanders has basically been viable everywhere while the others have been on a merry-go-round to see who's viable and shutting the others out rather than one of them collecting them all.

If you took them out and reduced it to a 1v1 you'd have to be making the bet that Sanders can outright win against whoever the other side is. He very well might be able to do so but OTOH it's unlikely he'd be able to run up the score like he did in Nevada on them. There probably is a point where Sanders would rather have it be 1v1 just so that his wins translate into more raw delegates but I don't think that time is now. Ideally, for him, it would be once he is the clear and overwhelming favorite such that the snowball effect of his wins just buries whoever his competitor is. I think the earliest this would be is after Super Tuesday. (Okay, actually the earliest would probably be if he won South Carolina but I'm assuming Biden wins there.)

---

KamikazePotato posted...

Why are you arbitrarily grouping Bloomberg and Amy together?

It's recursion on the Blob to the fallback choices. Bloomberg and Amy being the top of Pete's fallback choices is a significant discrepancy from other candidates. They're also straight-up the two most moderate candidates in the race. Buttigieg voters have a pretty strong alignment toward moderate candidates above the norm.

That being said I did misread your post, the point that the ideological voters aren't as significant as they're made out to be I absolutely agree on, first read sounded like you were making a stronger denial of them altogether. I would just steer away from the idea that those stats are very random which is pretty weak - it's full of easily recognizable trends there. The greater point is how Biden voters specifically aren't very ideological (even further than that, many of them cross over) and he's the strongest member of the Blob which then easily dismantles the dumb "52% Moderate Mandate!".

---

Nyt article talking about how superdelegates are willing to tear down the party before giving Sanders the nom. And that they will do anything to prevent him receiving it.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Nyt article talking about how superdelegates are willing to tear down the party before giving Sanders the nom. And that they will do anything to prevent him receiving it.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1233161007922601984?s=21

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1233161007922601984?s=21

Yeah, they want Obama to figure it out for them.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1233161007922601984?s=21

So many people in those replies who genuinely believe there is no Democratic establishment and that if there is, its Bernie?

How are these people real? *clutches heart* Hope...fading...

---

Speaking of NYT articles, I don't think this was mentioned but DOJ just went and created a Denaturalization Office to strip citizenship from naturalized immigrants.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/us/politics/denaturalization-immigrants-justice-department.html

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

So many people in those replies who genuinely believe there is no Democratic establishment and that if there is, its Bernie?

How are these people real? *clutches heart* Hope...fading...

There is a Dem establishment, but its fairly weak and does not have the ability to just snap its fingers and stop Bernie (and the fact that theyre not even taking steps like lining up behind Biden would suggest that their opposition is not all that strong).

---

xp1337 posted...

Speaking of NYT articles, I don't think this was mentioned but DOJ just went and created a Denaturalization Office to strip citizenship from naturalized immigrants.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/us/politics/denaturalization-immigrants-justice-department.html

This is fucking disgusting

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

(and the fact that theyre not even taking steps like lining up behind Biden would suggest that their opposition is not all that strong).

I think thats more a testament to how little faith they have in Joe, when he keeps saying bizarro shit like this:

https://twitter.com/philipwegmann/status/1233193577309786115?s=21

---

Well I mean they could line up behind Pete or Bloomberg instead if they were that concerned about Joe. The point is that theyre doing essentially nothing.

---

It is all talk to get concessions tbh

---

At this point, it's not like any of the other options the Dem establishment would prefer over Sanders are much better than Biden anyway. While not throwing their weight behind Biden now is a mistake, the bigger issues for them are A) assuming Sanders would fail on his own somehow rather than having a plan to stop him and B) having a fairly weak field of moderate candidates to begin with.
---

I don't think Biden can beat Trump. He is a walking gaffe. All the Dem candidates are extremely flawed in the moderate lane.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I don't think Biden can beat Trump. He is a walking gaffe. All the Dem candidates are extremely flawed in the moderate lane.

Yeah.....150 million people died of gun violence in the US? That would be half our population.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Well I mean they could line up behind Pete or Bloomberg instead if they were that concerned about Joe. The point is that theyre doing essentially nothing.

I think Joes massive lead in the 2019 polls spooked this, and now its basically too late.

When it looked like Joe had it wrapped up, they assumed any Bernie rumblings would fade away and didnt want the appearance of their fingers on the scales (remember the talk about how Obama would speak out to stop Bernie? The good Joe polls made him think it wasnt necessary until it was too late).

Now they know if they do it, it will specifically alienate the Bernie people, and Pete and Bloomberg are either not viable or too divisive to risk at this point, because if they go in on them and dont succeed, they lose credibility and clout even harder to the Bernie crowd.

---

Basically, tl;dr there explicitly IS a Democratic establishment, they are just INCREDIBLY incompetent in their machinations and inability to trust the voters.


---

---

There is a Democratic establishment, I think it's fair to say that most of them probably don't like Sanders. It's not fair to say they're scheming to rob him. Hell, it's not even fair to say they're some monolithic organization following a singular will.

---

The mood in this topic sure has changed now that Biden is the presumptive nominee again

---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

The mood in this topic sure has changed now that Biden is the presumptive nominee again

shit did we fall into another timeline

cuz Sanders is still the frontrunner in this one

---

I'd say Biden is virtually guaranteed to win the nomination now

---