DUMP TRUMP (previously 2020 candidates)

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

 Yes, but Sbenois would rather Trump win than Bernie.  

nan said:

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

 Yes, but Sbenois would rather Trump win than Bernie.  

 That is a blatant lie. 

Red_Barchetta said:

nan said:

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

 Yes, but Sbenois would rather Trump win than Bernie.  

 That is a blatant lie. 

 Really, than why does he want Bernie to run as an Independent?  Cause that's why Bernie does not want to run as an independent. 

nan said:

Red_Barchetta said:

nan said:

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

 Yes, but Sbenois would rather Trump win than Bernie.  

 That is a blatant lie. 

 Really, than why does he want Bernie to run as an Independent?  Cause that's why Bernie does not want to run as an independent. 

 You’re a liar.  I dont want to be anywhere near you when karma catches up with you.  

Here is what they are all afraid of happening:

Bernie Tries to Steal the Rich Man’s Party

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

Is anyone pushing for an independent candidate?

Turns out Klobuchar's foreign policy is as crappy as her domestic.  

nan said:
Turns out Klobuchar's foreign policy is as crappy as her domestic.  

 She must really worry you to be this vitriolic this early. Sad !

Dennis_Seelbach said:

nan said:
Turns out Klobuchar's foreign policy is as crappy as her domestic.  

 She must really worry you to be this vitriolic this early. Sad !

 I'm going through all the candidates, as everyone should.  I've focused on her policies, not the stories about her throwing binders at her staff, sabotaging them when they try to move to new employment and eating salad with a comb?  That would be vitriolic. 

So you accept the MSM's hit piece on Klobuchar?

She accepts anything that helps Tulsi Gabbard or that self-centered piece of trash Bernie.

STANV said:
So you accept the MSM's hit piece on Klobuchar?

 Do you mean the stuff about her personality?  Not really interested in that.  I base my judgement of candidates on platform, funding, and believablity.  If those stories are true, I feel sorry for the people who have to work with her, but not factoring that in unless it affects her ability to govern. 

nan said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

nan said:
Turns out Klobuchar's foreign policy is as crappy as her domestic.  

 She must really worry you to be this vitriolic this early. Sad !

 I'm going through all the candidates, as everyone should.  I've focused on her policies, not the stories about her throwing binders at her staff, sabotaging them when they try to move to new employment and eating salad with a comb?  That would be vitriolic. 

 Nan is suddenly worried about people knowing how to use a comb...

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

 William Weld, former Republican Governor of Massachusetts, is considering running as an Independent and says that he would take votes away from Trump. I don't agree but I wonder about people who would choose to vote for an Independent Third-Party Candidate rather than any Dem running against Trump. If there were no Independent would they just not vote? What motivates such people?

nan said:

STANV said:
So you accept the MSM's hit piece on Klobuchar?

 Do you mean the stuff about her personality?  Not really interested in that.  I base my judgement of candidates on platform, funding, and believablity.  If those stories are true, I feel sorry for the people who have to work with her, but not factoring that in unless it affects her ability to govern. 

 But what do you make of the fact that the MSM is attacking someone you see as establishment or corporatist?

STANV said:

nan said:

STANV said:
So you accept the MSM's hit piece on Klobuchar?

 Do you mean the stuff about her personality?  Not really interested in that.  I base my judgement of candidates on platform, funding, and believablity.  If those stories are true, I feel sorry for the people who have to work with her, but not factoring that in unless it affects her ability to govern. 

 But what do you make of the fact that the MSM is attacking someone you see as establishment or corporatist?

 I thought that was odd.  But, it is a provocative, colorful story, so maybe that's why they covered it. Someone eating a salad with a comb and then making a subordinate clean the comb is quite a funny image.  Seems like something you would see on SNL (did they mock her?).  She definitely comes across as a strange person in the article I read, but, as I said, I am skeptical of everything I read, and it would not be a show stopper for me when choosing a candidate.  

STANV said:

conandrob240 said:
people do realize that an independent candidate run would all but assure us that Trump will win, right?

 William Weld, former Republican Governor of Massachusetts, is considering running as an Independent and says that he would take votes away from Trump. I don't agree but I wonder about people who would choose to vote for an Independent Third-Party Candidate rather than any Dem running against Trump. If there were no Independent would they just not vote? What motivates such people?

 Really? I thought he decided to run as a Republican this time.

The only R that I think could challenge Trump is Kasich. I know he did poorly in the Primaries but he was given almost no questions on the debate stage. The few Rs that I know admitted they really liked him better but by the time NY and NJ got to vote, he was out of the race.

Just found this. https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2019/02/15/former-massachusetts-governor-bill-weld-explore-running-for-president-says/wgPTWQR2t0iHIVHigO7vYO/story.html

i really hope the comb was new? If Klobuchar ate salad with a comb that was in use, that’s really gross.

Smedley said:
i really hope the comb was new? If Klobuchar ate salad with a comb that was in use, that’s really gross.

 What's really gross is voting for a military budget greater than Trump asked for and supporting a coup in Venezuela.  I would support a candidate who ate with a comb found on the subway if they voted against war.

sbenois said:
She accepts anything that helps Tulsi Gabbard or that self-centered piece of trash Bernie.

 Keeping it classy.....

nan said:

There is nothing wrong with a "purity" test based on policies and how believable those positions are and how beholden the candidate is to donors.  

'Purity test' is a scary word. Very scary.

basil said:

nan said:

There is nothing wrong with a "purity" test based on policies and how believable those positions are and how beholden the candidate is to donors.  

'Purity test' is a scary word. Very scary.

 That's why they coined it--it's propaganda designed to shame people into falling in line.   So it's not really scary because it's made up.

basil said:

nan said:

There is nothing wrong with a "purity" test based on policies and how believable those positions are and how beholden the candidate is to donors.  

'Purity test' is a scary word. Very scary.

 Its kind of Atwoodian.

"Purity test" is a nice catchy bit of rhetoric that could get weaponized in this primary. I wouldn't be surprised to find out 10,000 fake Facebook accounts run by Russian bot farms start churning out posts about how Biden or Klobuchar or Harris fail some kind of Progressive Purity Test, complete with links to realistic but fake news sources. Target that stuff at self identified Gabbard or Sanders supporters. Then if one of the more centrist democrats wins the nomination there's this little voice in progressive's heads saying "I remember they fail the progressive purity test!" Come election day they throw up their hands that Biden (or whoever) is just as bad as Trump and they stay home or vote third party.

Repeat that formula with 10 million voters and maybe 10,000 of them stay home.

The 2016 election was lost by inches. It would suck if the 2020 election went the same way.

mrincredible said:
"Purity test" is a nice catchy bit of rhetoric that could get weaponized in this primary. I wouldn't be surprised to find out 10,000 fake Facebook accounts run by Russian bot farms start churning out posts about how Biden or Klobuchar or Harris fail some kind of Progressive Purity Test, complete with links to realistic but fake news sources. Target that stuff at self identified Gabbard or Sanders supporters. Then if one of the more centrist democrats wins the nomination there's this little voice in progressive's heads saying "I remember they fail the progressive purity test!" Come election day they throw up their hands that Biden (or whoever) is just as bad as Trump and they stay home or vote third party.
Repeat that formula with 10 million voters and maybe 10,000 of them stay home.
The 2016 election was lost by inches. It would suck if the 2020 election went the same way.

First of all, Biden, Klobuchar and Harris are not Progressives and so alleged Russian Bots would just be telling the truth.  Links to fake news sources will be discounted because Progressives listen to specific sources and would identify fake ones easily.  Saying the obvious will have no bearing on Progressives voting lesser evil.  Some will; some won't. What will have a bearing is more of the same stuff that was revealed by Wikileaks--the DNC actively sabotaging Progressives, giving out debate questions to centrists, and huge numbers of people suddenly dropped from polls-or polls closed, etc.  Mainstream media presenting obviously biased reporting (already happening), etc.  Bill Clinton standing outside of polling places campaigning on election day.  There was also lots of other fishy activity documented. I think people are more likely to participate in an election for lesser evil if they think their candidate lost fairly in the primary.   

nan said:...

 Links to fake news sources will be discounted because Progressives listen to specific sources and would identify fake ones easily...

LOL

says the person who believes Hillary eats hot sauce to win black votes. And that Bernie wuz robbed! of the nomination because of a DNC conspiracy.

I mean, really...

If you think that a massive bombardment of ads accusing Kamala Harris of failing a purity test targeted at progressive wouldn't have an effect on some of them you are kidding yourself. 

The 2016 election was a perfect example of how thin little slices of particular voting groups can be influenced. I'm not naive enough to think that without Russian meddling we'd definitely have President Clinton (and a seven-member Supreme Court because McConnell would find a way to continue blocking nominees) right now but I think it got us part of the way to President Trump. 

The whole rhetoric of "lesser evil" plays right into this as well. A lot of people who might vote for someone who aligns with (let's say) 65% of their political views might be convinced to stay home if they have to vote for one of two evils. Even if it's the same person, it's how they're framed in people's discussions.

drummerboy said:

nan said:...

 Links to fake news sources will be discounted because Progressives listen to specific sources and would identify fake ones easily...

 
LOL
says the person who believes Hillary eats hot sauce to win black votes. And that Bernie wuz robbed! of the nomination because of a DNC conspiracy.

I mean, really...

 I don't know about Hillary's hot sauce, but if you read the book, Shattered, you will see that almost everything about Hillary was staged for the audience, so the hot sauce might well have been too.

That the DNC worked for Hillary and against Bernie in 2016 is a documented fact, as shown by Wikileaks and Donna Brazille.  

mrincredible said:
If you think that a massive bombardment of ads accusing Kamala Harris of failing a purity test targeted at progressive wouldn't have an effect on some of them you are kidding yourself. 
The 2016 election was a perfect example of how thin little slices of particular voting groups can be influenced. I'm not naive enough to think that without Russian meddling we'd definitely have President Clinton (and a seven-member Supreme Court because McConnell would find a way to continue blocking nominees) right now but I think it got us part of the way to President Trump. 
The whole rhetoric of "lesser evil" plays right into this as well. A lot of people who might vote for someone who aligns with (let's say) 65% of their political views might be convinced to stay home if they have to vote for one of two evils. Even if it's the same person, it's how they're framed in people's discussions.

 You do know the whole Russia bot thing was basically a hoax, right?  Russian bots spent about $40K which is nothing, many ads ran after the election and then there was a fake group that pretended to be Russian bots so they could sell services to defend us from them.  

But, I still don't understand what you mean by a bunch of ads accusing KH of failing a purity test, when we all know she is not a Progressive.  She does fail the Progressive "purity test."  She does sorta kinda pretend to be one, so there will be lots of FB memes revealing how her background does not support the positions she supposedly holds presently.  Those will not be Russian bots.  Those will be Americans who are pissed off at KH and want you to vote for someone else.

I don't think you are giving people enough credit for thinking on their own.  I think everyone except Trump supporters wants to get rid of Trump so there is lots of motivation to vote in 2020.  I know personally, that if I felt the primary was run fairly and a centrist won, I would be fine with voting for them just to get rid of the orange menace.  I also know if I feel that they cheat again and treat Progressives like dirt and act like they don't even want our votes, than I will be less inclined to reward that bad behavior.  I might still, in the end, vote for lesser evil, as I did in 2016, but many will not. 

This is a substantive interview with Tulsi Gabbard with questions and time for reflective answers that you would probably not see on the mainstream news: