Page 1 of 4

2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 1:48 pm UTC
by sardia
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/ ... ck-1176018
With over a year and a half to go, and we already see systemic fake organic viral disinformation campaigns on each of the Democratic candidates. Some are from the 2016 actors, but other players are in too. (North Korea, Iran, gop operatives) welcome to hell early.

God I hope Democrats and Independents hold it together.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:42 pm UTC
by Soupspoon
I wonder how much protest/third-party/abstained voting there will be.

A silly question to ask before we know who needs protesting against and who might be third-party (Trump? Cast loose for toxicity, but not quite enough toxicity to floor him?), but I've seen regret mentioned over last time.

PTW?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:24 am UTC
by sardia
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/ ... nt-1214831
Hardline anti rape politician struggles to hold own staff accountable for sexual harassment.
[bibliography][/bibliography]
The episode suggests a disconnect between the senator’s categorical public stance and her office’s private actions. It also points to broader problems with sexual harassment investigations on Capitol Hill: They are usually conducted internally by top aides with pre-existing relationships in the office rather than by an independent third party — a structure that Gillibrand has criticized in other institutions such as the military.


While this may not matter, it hurts for someone with 0 endorsements so far. Bernie has way more than her. Not sure if it was the Clinton backstabbing or what. (Side note, Clinton and Trump deserve to be in jail together for sex crimes)

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:25 pm UTC
by Chen
sardia wrote:Not sure if it was the Clinton backstabbing or what. (Side note, Clinton and Trump deserve to be in jail together for sex crimes)


Uh what?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:28 pm UTC
by Mutex
Chen wrote:
sardia wrote:Not sure if it was the Clinton backstabbing or what. (Side note, Clinton and Trump deserve to be in jail together for sex crimes)


Uh what?

I think he means Bill, not Hillary.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:47 pm UTC
by gd1
Feeling the Bern. It's a good Bern.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:09 pm UTC
by sardia
Correct. But the two are intertwined. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cl ... llegations
It was a different time back then, but Bill Clinton's allegations aren't any better than Trump's. The power dynamics alone makes consensual sex very tricky if not impossible.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:11 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Stupid question. Has anyone publicly accused Trump of rape?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:05 pm UTC
by Dauric
CorruptUser wrote:Stupid question. Has anyone publicly accused Trump of rape?


Not sure about rape, but Trump admitted to sexual assault with his 'pussy grabbing' comment on the Access Hollywood tape. Did practically nothing to his campaign. Not sure that accusations of rape, or even a conviction for that matter, would shake his supporters.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:12 pm UTC
by Xeio
His ex wife, though she's now bound by a confidentiality agreement that prevents her from speaking about him and has said of her deposition "As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense".

Make of that what you will.

There are more numerous accusations of sexual assault.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:39 pm UTC
by sardia
Beto has declared, but he looks weak. https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/statu ... 2046153729
Beto’s such a weird candidate, and the press coverage of him is also so weird (obsessive but currently quite cynical but also prone to big mood swings) that I think it’s probably best to stick to objective benchmarks (e.g. polls, fundraising) when analyzing his chances. Is he signing top staffers? Getting endorsements? Drawing big audiences? These are fairly objective metrics too. Obviously, I'm in favor of objective measures generally, but there are some candidates for whom the "narrative" can get especially detached from reality. That's why IMO the fundraising numbers—not a great sign that he hasn't released them yet (although I guess we'll see)—are more important than the hot takes. And so are the polls over the next few weeks. It's not that they tell you *that* much, but I don't trust the alternatives.

I'm surprised who the leading people are in the horse race after stripping away likeability/positions/experience etc etc, and drop down to the (measurable, but rough estimates) basics. You end up with people like Biden, Bernie, and Kamala Harris? That's not who I expected to be leading right now. I wonder if Warren and Kirsten G. realize they are behind.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:36 pm UTC
by Thesh
Yeah, I don't understand at all how people can be excited about him, other than he was a centrist with a chance of defeating a conservative, but he was still and underdog and he still lost. I just don't see what he brings to the national stage.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 6:36 pm UTC
by Mutex
He came close to beating Ted Cruz in Texas didn't he? That's pretty impressive even if he ended up losing. I can see why people might think he'd be a strong Centrist candidate who'd stand a chance of peeling away enough GOP voters to vote for him, or more likely, just not energising them enough to go out and vote for the GOP candidate.

But I can also see why left wing Dems aren't excited by him in the slightest.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 6:58 pm UTC
by Thesh
That's tough to say, because a lot of that is anti-Trump backlash and differences in turnout due to enthusiasm:

2018: Cruz - 4,260,553, O'Rourke - 4,045,632; House: R - 4,135,359, D - 3,852,752
2016: House; R - 4,877,605, D - 3,160,535
2014: House; R - 2,684,592 D - 1,474,016
2012: Cruz - 4,440,137, Sadler - 3,194,927; House: 4,429,270, D - 2,949,900

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 7:28 pm UTC
by cyanyoshi
It's kind of weird how much nationwide support Beto had in 2018 in the form of favorable media coverage and donations, maybe by having a realistic shot of getting Ted Cruz out of the Senate. Who knows if he can rise to the top of a crowded Democratic primary against contenders like Bernie and Kamala who seem to want the nomination a lot more, but he should have very good odds of becoming president if he does.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:07 pm UTC
by Thesh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzojeicxB9w

That's the progressive take; tl:dw, he is getting so much positive coverage because he is supported by the oil industry, and corporate media sticks with corporate oil.

From the video, the only candidate who gets more oil and gas money is Ted Cruz:

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/ ... hp?ind=E01

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2019 11:32 pm UTC
by MartianInvader
Huh. This thread started by pointing out the vast disinformation campaigns being launched against candidates via social media, and now is discussing candidates by referencing attacks on them on social media.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Mar 27, 2019 12:14 am UTC
by gd1
sardia wrote:Beto has declared, but he looks weak. https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/statu ... 2046153729
Beto’s such a weird candidate, and the press coverage of him is also so weird (obsessive but currently quite cynical but also prone to big mood swings) that I think it’s probably best to stick to objective benchmarks (e.g. polls, fundraising) when analyzing his chances. Is he signing top staffers? Getting endorsements? Drawing big audiences? These are fairly objective metrics too. Obviously, I'm in favor of objective measures generally, but there are some candidates for whom the "narrative" can get especially detached from reality. That's why IMO the fundraising numbers—not a great sign that he hasn't released them yet (although I guess we'll see)—are more important than the hot takes. And so are the polls over the next few weeks. It's not that they tell you *that* much, but I don't trust the alternatives.

I'm surprised who the leading people are in the horse race after stripping away likeability/positions/experience etc etc, and drop down to the (measurable, but rough estimates) basics. You end up with people like Biden, Bernie, and Kamala Harris? That's not who I expected to be leading right now. I wonder if Warren and Kirsten G. realize they are behind.


Biden - Obama
Bernie - Guy with a track record of fighting for people consistently for 30 years
Harris - Not sure

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2019 7:36 pm UTC
by sardia
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is ... for-biden/
Biden has consistently led in early primary polls, and in head-to-head polls against President Trump, but he still hasn’t entered the 2020 Democratic presidential primary (although he’s expected to declare in April).

But who wants Biden to run? He doesn’t seem to be regarded as a front runner by party activists or those already in the field, and now two women have alleged that Biden touched them inappropriately, resurfacing his history of being physical in his interactions with women. [Editor’s note: After this chat concluded, The New York Times published a report about two more women who described physical interactions with Biden that made them uncomfortable]


Biden has a lot of baggage (defending Justice Thomas, treatment of black criminals), and represents the old guard. He's also at best is creepy me too warning, and at worst a rapist alongside Clinton and Trump.
Part of me hopes he runs and crashes. People need to realize that metoo is serious business, even if it's just Democrats who do it. Especially after the Virginia leadership debacle.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:31 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
Has a sitting president ever failed to secure his party's nom? Could we make history, please?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2019 8:43 pm UTC
by sardia
CorruptUser wrote:Has a sitting president ever failed to secure his party's nom? Could we make history, please?

Mueller was the best hope for Republicans to stop licking Trump's boot. Trump needs to show serious weakness either among his base, with undeniable crimes like Mueller, or the economy crumbles. Then the knives come out from the GOP. Trump's staff is preventing most of the worst case scenarios (hard to believe,I know). While it could happen, don't expect much unless the economy slips into recession or Trump's aides let something big slip through ("wars are easy to win' or " fire Mueller", or " let's shut down the borders")

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:25 pm UTC
by freezeblade
sardia wrote:("wars are easy to win' or " fire Mueller", or " let's shut down the borders")


Well, the last one he's currently threatening to do. He's pretty close on the first one too (Trade wars are easy to win).

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2019 10:10 pm UTC
by Pfhorrest
wouldn't shutting down a border mean not having a functional border anymore, i.e. anyone can cross unimpeded?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2019 10:10 pm UTC
by LaserGuy
CorruptUser wrote:Has a sitting president ever failed to secure his party's nom? Could we make history, please?


It hasn't happened before, though the primary system is a fairly recent development so it's possible there's some historic examples where it could have. The closest we have in the current system was Ford in '76, who beat out Reagan by a mere 43 delegates (out of over 2000), but then, of course, went on the lose the general.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:17 am UTC
by Soupspoon
Pfhorrest wrote:wouldn't shutting down a border mean not having a functional border anymore, i.e. anyone can cross unimpeded?

They'd probably close the barriers at the Entry Points, refuse to process and allow through any crossing traffic (or any inwardly crossing, at least). Assuming that this doesn't also happen at airports on all direct flights in from Mexico (or blanket refusal to process/automatically return back, anyone with an origin in Mexico via any 3rd-country layovers) then there'd be passenger transit available to those who would be able to switch to air (or water-equivalent?) but it'd be awkward for much of the usual transits, including for road/rail-goods.

For your average Joe (or, of course, José) with a regular/semi-frequent 'commute', this would disrupt their travel. Especially the ones who do commute (live in one side of a border town, have legitimate work on the other - I'm sure it's not unknown). And, being familiar with the border they're perhaps more likely to then find a non-EP crossing point to use, or use one they've always known but have been able to avoid using. That'll end well, I'm sure, with or without additional border patrols/monitoring beyond the EPs (even if they draft some of the inactive EP-staff to that, it'll need far more feet on the ground), something that the Democrats have been willing to back with funding as the more cost-effective alternative to the Bigly Dumb Wall.


Yeah, it'll be a mess, probably. If Trump is serious (rather than just throwing his random memes around to be picked up by his base) then I have doubts he's actually got answers to much of the objections. I suspect, though, that he has no answers to it and never intended to. Just like his Twitter messages 'to' foreign leaders are not in any way his official communiques to them (one would imagine there's diplomatic traffic doing that job) and is just a publicity machine signalling to the masses. I hope.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:16 am UTC
by bbluewi
LaserGuy wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Has a sitting president ever failed to secure his party's nom? Could we make history, please?


It hasn't happened before, though the primary system is a fairly recent development so it's possible there's some historic examples where it could have. The closest we have in the current system was Ford in '76, who beat out Reagan by a mere 43 delegates (out of over 2000), but then, of course, went on the lose the general.

The only example of a sitting president losing his party's nomination at the convention is Millard Fillmore in 1852, though the Whigs did end up nominating him at their last convention in 1856.

Lyndon Johnson certainly would have lost in 1968 had he not dropped out at the end of March, and you already pointed out Ford.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:14 am UTC
by eran_rathan
Regarding the border commute, there are literally thousands of people who cross the border every day to work, including a lot of American citizens.


https://psmag.com/.amp/news/what-would- ... y-for-work

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2019 4:35 pm UTC
by ObsessoMom
This story was big here in San Diego a few weeks ago. (San Ysidro is a border-area neighborhood of the City of San Diego.)

9-Year-Old Girl Was Detained at Border for 30 Hours Despite Being a U.S. Citizen

The New York Times wrote:A 9-year-old United States citizen was detained at a Southern California border checkpoint for more than 30 hours this week while the authorities said they worked to verify her identity.

The girl, identified by NBC 7 San Diego as Julia Isabel Amparo Medina, had been making her daily commute from Tijuana, Mexico — where she and her 14-year-old brother, Oscar, live — to school in San Ysidro, Calif., on Monday, the news station said. Because traffic was moving slowly, Julia and Oscar opted to walk across the border rather than wait in the car and risk tardiness, according to NBC 7, which first reported the story.

In an email on Friday, a Customs and Border Protection spokesman said two children arrived at one of the San Ysidro port of entry facilities for pedestrians at 10:15 a.m. on Monday. The children, whom the spokesman did not identify, presented a C.B.P. officer with United States passport cards, according to the spokesman, Ralph DeSio.

“The younger child provided inconsistent information during her inspection, and C.B.P. officers took the 9-year-old into custody to perform due diligence in confirming her identity and citizenship,” Mr. DeSio said.

He did not elaborate on what information was inconsistent, saying only: “Some specifics of our techniques for determining the true identity of a person crossing the border are law enforcement sensitive information. In addition, some details of this case are restricted from release due to privacy concerns.”

Eventually, border agents confirmed that the teenager was a United States citizen and he was permitted to enter the country, Mr. DeSio said. Then, around 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, the 9-year-old girl was admitted to the United States and released to her mother after the authorities confirmed her identity and her citizenship, Mr. DeSio said.

[...]

Thousands of people travel through the Tijuana-San Ysidro crossing every day for school or work.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2019 7:06 pm UTC
by Sungura
gd1 wrote:Biden - Obama
Bernie - Guy with a track record of fighting for people consistently for 30 years
Harris - Not sure

Biden is creepy; no thanks
Bernie - he keeps trying, and keeps failing, yes he has some good policies but there are issues with him, and fresh folk would be better

I guess it really depends on what you're looking for. I dont totally like any of the candidates, but am keeping my eye on Yang and Tulsi. dems keep trying to go back to middle ground which keeps shifting us farther away. They're so worried about trying to gain conservative report, they are playing a losing game.

Then you have the issues of presidents keep winning who are losing by popular vote (bush, trump). You need a candidate who excites the youth at this point. And again here dems need to stop playing the middle ground. Bernie would have likely a better shot in 2016, but I really think at this point the chance is past and newer ideas than even his are needed. He wont get the 'middle ground' support, and nor will the youth/more 'radical' will support him, so he has a thin margin behind him despite being pushed as The Popular Dem Choice. Again. Dems playing a dumb losing game.

In the end, the race comes down to who spends the most money and who has the most support from corporations. Usually the underdogs actually have the best ideas, it seems. Really it just seems further proof of how broken and un-democratic the US actually is.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 2:02 am UTC
by gd1
I'm tired of corporate corruption messing over everything. I'm going to do my part and vote for Bernie and hope it works. Don't know if it will, but I have to at least try.

Edit: removed second part, didn't seem good.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:09 pm UTC
by sardia
Do you guys have any citation for this? Especially the corporations and undemocratic part. I feel that we use them as scapegoats when we don't want to recognize the uglier truth of what the populace really wants. (I'm counting the part of the country that doesn't vote because life/stress etc etc). Just look at the 2018 midterms, we know so many terrible things Trump does, and his GOP enablers, but turnout didn't even reach presidential levels. Let's face it, most potential voters don't care/doesn't affect them/apathetic. I understand that structurally, we can do more to boost voter turnout, but you will only see failure if you rely on the youth to bail you out. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/2018-mi ... for-growth

Sungura, how do you know if the Democrats are playing a losing game regarding who to pander to? Citation? What voting blocs are big enough given what the midterms have shown us?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:17 pm UTC
by Thesh
Where do their wants come from? Just like their wants as consumers comes from advertising, their politics all come from propaganda that is pushed by necessity because good journalism, transparent corporations and government, competitive markets, and more direct forms of democracy would necessarily cause most large corporations to not exist and most profits to go down. This is why capitalists consistently embrace fascism all over the world: because democracy and education are bad for business.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:52 pm UTC
by Sungura
It is an easy google - who raises the most money gets the party bid, almost always. Individuals dont have that much money to give to elections, we are poor enough as it is. The money comes from corporations/the rich. For example, 2016 election, Hillary raised 1.4Billion, Trump 957 Million, compared with those who did not get the bid, for the Dems next most was Sanders at $240Million (left race in July, at which point Hillary had ammassed about $700 million); for Repubs next most was Cruz with $93 million (left race in May with $182 million, which Trump was as $250million at that point)

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... edirect=on

You can't say it's a fair race, when our choices are literally created by the the folk funding the candidates who will help them profit as they wish, and the most funding wins, ergo, the rich win.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:55 pm UTC
by gd1

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:27 pm UTC
by Chen
Sungura wrote:You can't say it's a fair race, when our choices are literally created by the the folk funding the candidates who will help them profit as they wish, and the most funding wins, ergo, the rich win.


It's still the individual people registered for each party who vote in the primaries. Apathy is also what leads money to make so big a difference. If people cared a lot about the end results you'd think they'd try to do their own digging/research to see what was going on. Or you can just listen to the soundbytes or commercials and draw the conclusions the advertisers want you to draw.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:40 pm UTC
by gd1
Chen wrote:
Sungura wrote:You can't say it's a fair race, when our choices are literally created by the the folk funding the candidates who will help them profit as they wish, and the most funding wins, ergo, the rich win.


It's still the individual people registered for each party who vote in the primaries. Apathy is also what leads money to make so big a difference. If people cared a lot about the end results you'd think they'd try to do their own digging/research to see what was going on. Or you can just listen to the soundbytes or commercials and draw the conclusions the advertisers want you to draw.


I'm not sure everyone has time to do research these days. Also, influence over a long time can affect people as well. The fox news bubble for example.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:52 pm UTC
by idonno
Sungura wrote:It is an easy google - who raises the most money gets the party bid, almost always.

Yes but the more likely you are to win, the more donations you are likely to get. Gratitude from the loser is worthless. Measuring to what degree winners generate donations vs donations generating winners is a difficult task.

It is made especially complicated by the fact that everyone directly involved has an incentive to maintain both narratives depending on who they are talking to.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:00 pm UTC
by sardia
Sungura wrote:It is an easy google - who raises the most money gets the party bid, almost always. Individuals dont have that much money to give to elections, we are poor enough as it is. The money comes from corporations/the rich. For example, 2016 election, Hillary raised 1.4Billion, Trump 957 Million, compared with those who did not get the bid, for the Dems next most was Sanders at $240Million (left race in July, at which point Hillary had ammassed about $700 million); for Repubs next most was Cruz with $93 million (left race in May with $182 million, which Trump was as $250million at that point)

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... edirect=on

You can't say it's a fair race, when our choices are literally created by the the folk funding the candidates who will help them profit as they wish, and the most funding wins, ergo, the rich win.

https://www-m.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politi ... gle.com%2F
2015, Jeb Bush had the most money raised, but for some reason Trump won the nomination. Is this an outlier? Or are you confusing correlation with causation? What if the winners of the nomination get more donations?

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:04 pm UTC
by sardia

Isn't that general lobbying? If all this stuff really worked, then Bernie would be corrupted as well. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ ... ica-119185
Bernie isn't unaffected by corruption. Neither is Warren. Not saying corporations can't be beaten back, but Bernie isn't special here.

Re: 2020 Presidency Campaign for the Future

Posted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:31 pm UTC
by gd1
sardia wrote:

Isn't that general lobbying? If all this stuff really worked, then Bernie would be corrupted as well. https://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ ... ica-119185
Bernie isn't unaffected by corruption. Neither is Warren. Not saying corporations can't be beaten back, but Bernie isn't special here.


Bernie has been pretty consistent for 30 years or more in his position though. At least from what I've seen. I'd like some indications relating to Bernie and corruption. I've seen some stuff, but the few times (2 or 3 so far) I've researched them it turns out to be misinformation.