Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Never Trust
Not to me. I'd prefer that he'd lose. Now Sanders high numbers worry me. I'd much rather see Warren or Harris win the nomination.
Trump delenda est
Biden’s core base of support seems to be the Democratic Party establishment (he’s got far more endorsements from Democratic officials than any other candidate: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-endorsements/democratic-primary/?ex_cid=rrpromo) rather than the grasssroots, while the opposite is true of Sanders. Warren is somewhere in the middle in both respects.
That’s a problem for Biden. Obama showed the value of having a large, dedicated network of supporters and volunteers with a positive motivation. Biden doesn’t have that. Antipathy for Trump isn’t the same thing as genuine, committed, active enthusiasm for your candidate.
I would love a Sanders-Warren or Warren-Sanders ticket.
Edited by Galadriel on Oct 6th 2019 at 7:12:46 AM
Personally, I am extremely pleased with those results. Seeing strong progressives like Warren and Sanders beating out Biden is lovely 
I'd prefer Warren to Sanders but considering that his support has mostly remained static and hers has not I don't mind if he has higher fundraising numbers then she does.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Oct 6th 2019 at 4:12:00 AM
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
Worrying in the sense that Biden has significant polling support, and could easily win the nomination (him and Warren are likely bets, Sanders is an outside bet, everyone else needs a miracle). But if his voting base isn't donating and highly motivated, that's a big weakness in the general.
Personally, I'd prefer Warren, but since my biggest concern is dumping Trump...
Edited by Rationalinsanity on Oct 6th 2019 at 8:13:02 AM
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
rather than the grasssroots, while the opposite is trye of Sanders. Warren is so ewhere in the middle in both respects.
That link disproves your hypothesis, if Establishment support was enough to determine one's support then Harris and Booker would be strong contenders instead of being mostly weak. It's more likely that Biden is just a strong candidate and the Establishment supports him because of that.
"Sandwiches are probably easier to fix than the actual problems" -Hylarn
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
@trickerson: Well, it’s worrying for HIM.
Sanders has always done well with fundraisers, so I’m not surprised that he’s in the lead, but Warren seems pretty close in second place there, plus she’s beating him in the polls. Factor in Biden’s own numbers, and I honestly think she might be able to win this.
That said, while I don’t doubt she can win the primary, I actually do have some worries with the general, primarily that her relative lack of support among African Americans might cost her the same way it apparently cost Hillary, unless there’s been a surge there that I’m unaware of.
Edited by KarkatTheDalek on Oct 6th 2019 at 7:15:41 AM
Oh God! Natural light!
My hypothesis was never that establishment support alone was enough to become a frontrunner. But it will attract Democratic voters who don’t have another strong preference, especially if the person in question is, like Biden, someone well-known (much more so than Harris) who seems electable and safe.
But the fundraising numbers indicate that he doesn’t have a strong, dedicated following of individuals; he’s not inspiring people, he’s just the most well-known and least risky option. That’s a weak foundation compared to what Obama had.
Edited by Galadriel on Oct 6th 2019 at 7:19:49 AM
Never Trust
Should be noted that Hilary Clinton's weakness was among black men. 94% of black women who voted, voted for her.
Trump delenda est
There has been a slight uptick.
Some food for thought though; Obama didn't start getting significant black support until after he won Iowa. And he wasn't in the lead in Iowa until practically January.
His team on Pod Save America describe them as some of the most nerve wracking days in their lives.
Not as angry as the name would suggest.
Well, Warren seems to have good polls in Iowa, so hopefully that’s a good sign.
Oh God! Natural light!
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
That’s an excellent point. 538 had an interesting post about possible reasons why African-Anericans tend to support more centrist Democrats. One of the ones that stood out to me is that elections have, typically, higher stakes for black Americans than for white Americans; there’s a tendency to support the candidate who seems to have the best chance of winning the general election. Though I expect that Biden having been Obama’s VP also helps him.
If Warren can give people confidence that she can beat Trump, she may start doing better among black voters.
Edited by Galadriel on Oct 6th 2019 at 7:23:01 AM
Also worth noting that fundrasing for Biden can be missleading specificly because he is in the lead, if your prefered canidate is in the front you are going to be a lot more complacent in giving them money, since why would you?
It isn’t like his the runaway favourite or anything, to the point of not needing donations. It’s pretty close between him and Warren now.
I can’t stop being impressed with how much Sanders - and AOC and the other young new senators with her - has shifted the Overton Window to the left. We’ve gone from universal healthcare being a fringe position to being a major topic of debate among Democratic candidates. We’ve got both Sanders and Warren advocating major tax changes focused on the super-rich; Democrats tended to be allergic to the word “tax”. There’s real discussion of free postsecondary education.
I read Warren’s platform on her website, and I’m very pleased with it - both the proposals themselves, and the level of clarity and detail and the strong arguments in favour of them.
Edited by Galadriel on Oct 6th 2019 at 7:51:15 AM
It's also a matter of where it comes from. Sanders and Warren can post those numbers because their donors aren't likely to hit the donation cap. Biden donors, on the other hand, do have to worry about that.
Edited by TheRoguePenguin on Oct 6th 2019 at 4:49:45 AM
Yes, he’s getting larger sums of money from far fewer donors than Sanders and Warren are.
Sanders has 1.4 million donors; Warren has 943,000; Biden has 345,000. That doesn’t indicate a strong, dedicated support base for Biden.
Edited by Galadriel on Oct 6th 2019 at 8:01:59 AM
I'm also concerned about that, but in the last month or so there have been some polls indicating that she's gained ground with black voters while Biden has lost ground with them, by I think about 10% or so for each of them.
That still doesn't leave Warren in a great position since Biden still has over 40% of black voters, but if Warren can continue to win them over it could well be enough for her to win.
This is why winning in Iowa is so much more important for Warren than it is for Biden. As someone else said, "You need to win to prove you can win." Taking Iowa means Warren is considered electable by the first round of Democratic voters, which the rest of the party will take notice of.
Not to me. I'd prefer that he'd lose. Now Sanders high numbers worry me. I'd much rather see Warren or Harris win the nomination.
I wouldn't worry about Sanders winning. Despite the impressive fundraising, he's completely failed to gain momentum or traction while Warren has consistently gotten stronger in the polls. Barring something very drastic happening, it's gonna be Biden vs Warren in the end.
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Sander's poll numbers have stalled.
It seems like he's got his base and that's about it.
Oh really when?
I think the key is how much of Sanders' base is going to flock to Warren when he drops out, and whether she'll get enough of the black base to support her. Those are the two primary factors in determining whether she can beat Biden.
It’s surprising how old all the Democratic frontrunners in this race are (for that matter, so is Trump). Warren is 70, Biden is 76, and Sanders is 78. And Trump is 73.
Has there been any previous general election where both candidates were over 70?
Oh, bother.
This is why I think Sanders is done. He cannot get anyone outside of his base, and he can't win with just his base. And he can't change to win people outside of his base without alienating his base. Not that Sanders is really capable of changing much in the first place — old dogs and new tricks and all that.
The heart attack scare certainly didn't help.
Edited by M84 on Oct 6th 2019 at 8:30:17 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised
Disasturbator
I had no idea Warren was in her 70s
New theme music also a box
Neither did I until recently.
Yeah, Biden's numbers are worrying.
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.