Democratic Debates

[Taleweaver]

I watched some youtube-parts of it. My main opinion:

Who the f*** are all those people?


Of course, as a foreigner, my views are a bit skewed. Even things like Trump almost starting a war with Iran is at best page six in my local newspaper, and I bet at least half my country wouldn't be able to tell Mike Pence when bumping into him on the street. But even with my interest in US politics, I can barely tell anyone apart (oh, so THAT's that Buttigieg guy?). I've heard of Warren, Biden and of course Sanders, but that's about it. It's not fun for them (ey...one of these is going to have to clean up the mess that Trump leaves behind), but I'll wait out until there's just a handful left.

 

[SG854]

Cory Booker he was saying he basically lives in the hood, ha ha. I hear gun shots. lol.




De Blasio said what separates him from other candidates was that he raised a black son in America, haaaaaaaaaaaahaaaahaaaa.


You hear that Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders he just 1 upped you guys, he has a black son.

 

[cots]

I watched some youtube-parts of it. My main opinion:

Who the f*** are all those people?


Of course, as a foreigner, my views are a bit skewed. Even things like Trump almost starting a war with Iran is at best page six in my local newspaper, and I bet at least half my country wouldn't be able to tell Mike Pence when bumping into him on the street. But even with my interest in US politics, I can barely tell anyone apart (oh, so THAT's that Buttigieg guy?). I've heard of Warren, Biden and of course Sanders, but that's about it. It's not fun for them (ey...one of these is going to have to clean up the mess that Trump leaves behind), but I'll wait out until there's just a handful left.

I'm not sure who they are either. Not only was the debate (whatever it was about) not on my radar, but just like when Trump was debating his opponents (which I also didn't pay attention to) they are just a bunch of politicians. Expect nothing, but blatant lies.

I like Trump's "mess" and I don't see any of them, whomever they are, replacing him. I expect another 4 years under the current mumbling idiot, who is actually doing an okay job. I'll reserve my judgement for the next stool pigeon to replace him after that a happens (4 years from now, give or take a few months).

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Cory Booker he was saying he basically lives in the hood, ha ha. I hear gun shots. lol.

Until a politician shows up that has been arrested for something he didn't do, injured in the incident then sent to a mental hospital without his consent and then released into the inner city wearing a hospital gown with no shoes, no money and no one to call and makes it out of that mess I can't see any of them saying they can "relate" to living in the hood. Let's see him live off of 1/2 of what is considered "being in poverty", sleeping under bridges and trying to eat off of less than $100 in food stamps a month. How many times a day does he hear those gun shots? Next!

 

[Xzi]

Cory Booker he was saying he basically lives in the hood, ha ha. I hear gun shots. lol.

To be fair, there really aren't any nice parts of New Jersey, it's basically all the hood. Lol.

 

[Taleweaver]

I'm not sure who they are either. Not only was the debate (whatever it was about) not on my radar, but just like when Trump was debating his opponents (which I also didn't pay attention to) they are just a bunch of politicians. Expect nothing, but blatant lies.

Sorry...you must've watched the wrong show. These aren't republican candidates.

 

[Xzi]

I like Trump's "mess" and I don't see any of them, whomever they are, replacing him.

Of course you don't see it when you don't want to see it. The top three are all polling 10+ points ahead of Trump nationally, however, and Trump has managed to lose a lot of his support in the Midwest by failing to live up to any of his campaign promises.

 

[Clydefrosch]

I watched some youtube-parts of it. My main opinion:

Who the f*** are all those people?

That's like one of the biggest issues with elections all across the globe, but especially in the usa.

These shouldn't be popularity contests, except for like major past scandals or major past accomplishments, wether you 'know' any candidate or not shouldn't even matter.
Their positions is what matters.


This is similar to NY's mayor being, by polls, the worst mayor in the states.
He's far from the worst, people just generally hate mayors and he, among the other top 10 of 'worst' mayors, is just like the most known across the nation. Most americans are more likely to know his name than the name of their own mayor, so on a numbers based poll, he'll always end up with the most 'worst of them all' votes.

 

[Clydefrosch]

okay you had me until you compared Antifa to the Proud Boys. Proud Boys aren't in the same league as Antifa, who are actually radical and protected by some in the media.

so proud boys and patriot prayer and whatever else flashy names they give themselves are not radical, don't bring weapons to their 'protests' and don't constantly get support from the right side of the media?
And where does 'antifa' get backed by the media? If anything, mainstream media outlets jump on the scaremongering bandwagon too.
I mean, come on, what paralell world are you living in?

 

[Taleweaver]

That's like one of the biggest issues with elections all across the globe, but especially in the usa.

Erm...I do have to stress the fact that I'm a foreigner (and so are you, really). I hadn't heard of Donald Trump before he trashed his colleague republicans in the race to the white house either, but apparently he's some sort of local celebrity over there. That's fine too (or rather: it would've been fine if that status was for achieving something in the field he was running for, but that's a different matter).

I mean...I don't expect foreigners to know who Charles Michel, Bart De Wever, Elio Di Rupo or similar people are. As long as the local population has heard of them, that's okay.

The thing is...though I follow US and UK politics somewhat, I can pinpoint most of the new UK prime minister candidates, but I cannot say who most of these people are. And I'm not sure if that's their fault. I mean...why do I know what "A.O.C." stands for, even though she's not a candidate?

 

[Clydefrosch]

Erm...I do have to stress the fact that I'm a foreigner (and so are you, really). I hadn't heard of Donald Trump before he trashed his colleague republicans in the race to the white house either, but apparently he's some sort of local celebrity over there. That's fine too (or rather: it would've been fine if that status was for achieving something in the field he was running for, but that's a different matter).

I mean...I don't expect foreigners to know who Charles Michel, Bart De Wever, Elio Di Rupo or similar people are. As long as the local population has heard of them, that's okay.

The thing is...though I follow US and UK politics somewhat, I can pinpoint most of the new UK prime minister candidates, but I cannot say who most of these people are. And I'm not sure if that's their fault. I mean...why do I know what "A.O.C." stands for, even though she's not a candidate?

Because AOC is of a much younger, social media oriented generation and she's popular with a lot of people, including political satire and daily shows.
And because that is true, the other side of the media too has a ridiculously large investent in trying to take her down. Like, fox news did entire days with back to back AOC bashing, 95%+ of it very transparently misrepresenting all of her political positions and accomplishments.
So it'd be hard not to hear of her.

Similarily to how it would be hard to not know Donald trump. Granted, it was kinda quiet about him for a half-decade somewhere, so there may be one generation of people who were spared that mans nonsense...

The others are mostly local politicians or senators, of course they wouldn't be known all over the place prior to running for president, because in normal, working politics, people don't make a spectacle out of it.

But again, neither would they need to be. Being known isn't a criteria in being a good leader or an indicator of how well anyone would represent the will of the people.

 

[Taleweaver]

Because AOC is of a much younger, social media oriented generation and she's popular with a lot of people, including political satire and daily shows.
And because that is true, the other side of the media too has a ridiculously large investent in trying to take her down. Like, fox news did entire days with back to back AOC bashing, 95%+ of it very transparently misrepresenting all of her political positions and accomplishments.
So it'd be hard not to hear of her.

Similarily to how it would be hard to not know Donald trump. Granted, it was kinda quiet about him for a half-decade somewhere, so there may be one generation of people who were spared that mans nonsense...

The others are mostly local politicians or senators, of course they wouldn't be known all over the place prior to running for president, because in normal, working politics, people don't make a spectacle out of it.

But again, neither would they need to be. Being known isn't a criteria in being a good leader or an indicator of how well anyone would represent the will of the people.

Yup. That's the thing I was referring to: why is she going viral with everything she does (which causes the opposition to waste time trying to debunk that) whereas these people hardly make a wrinkle?


Or to put it more cynical (because this is the USA we're talking about): if you're not being trashed by Fox and/or Donald Trump, you really aren't putting in your best effort as a democrat.

 

[FAST6191]

For the most part wake me up when the candidates have been actually thinned out, and the no hopers publicity boosting for their next book are gone. I will pay attention then. That said when I have been paying attention they all seem pretty weak and forgettable which is probably not ideal there, to say nothing of the rather split nature of the party at present.

Conservatives feel attacked here and on other websites(reddit,twitter,ect.) so they feel the need to be more vocal. Temp used to ban people much more than it does now. I think since the mods changed so much over the years most don't care enough just to ban people for having different views.

The entire time I have been here I don't recall people being banned or otherwise sanctioned for having different views, much less mainstream US/EU/English speaking world type ones (granted there are massive differences there). Can't speak to other sites as I am not on them. I would certainly agree the US right wing (which compared to a lot of the rest of the world is incredibly right wing, or at least incredibly different*) would tend to have had to justify everything it does, though it seems most US politics these days has since become a complete circus so now everything needs to be justified all the time.

*no UK right wing party would care about getting rid of national healthcare (such a thing would be political suicide, indeed the most likely next UK prime minister kind of had funding it as a slogan during the leave the EU campaign), gun rights are not a thing most are concerned with (indeed you could happily be a right wing UK politico and want to make things harder for gun owners without any real pushback**), outside of Ireland nobody cares at all about abortion really (some might have personal views but they will not be expressed unless pushed and nobody will really push), the rough equivalent of states rights internally in the UK would be devolved parliaments and those tend to be fairly agreed upon across the board (EU stuff, so called Euroscepticism is predominantly a UK right wing affair but not always), military wise then it is not a particularly good thing to make as your base platform or major talking point (and in any case is not a particularly left or right centric issue) and most just want it done properly***, the only reason anybody would mention communism is if they are talking about history or somewhere else in the world, lowering taxes is a minor note for most parties... and that is pretty much every topic I saw done to death in the US elections I was running around there to witness.

**and if they made it harder for the man on the street but helped the gun club/collector/existing infrastructure set then probably complete non issue.

***the new aircraft carrier stuff (all the old ones were long in the tooth so nice new one was made, but it is overrun and technically the UK is now without one, being a point of contention for everybody involved. Similar grumbles about a lack of helicopters and everybody that was not holding one had a little giggle at the earlier revisions of the L85, and those more in the know might have wondered why it got to A3 rather than being replaced as per the original timelines.

 

[Deleted-401606]

For the most part wake me up when the candidates have been actually thinned out, and the no hopers publicity boosting for their next book are gone. I will pay attention then. That said when I have been paying attention they all seem pretty weak and forgettable which is probably not ideal there, to say nothing of the rather split nature of the party at present.


The entire time I have been here I don't recall people being banned or otherwise sanctioned for having different views, much less mainstream US/EU/English speaking world type ones (granted there are massive differences there). Can't speak to other sites as I am not on them. I would certainly agree the US right wing (which compared to a lot of the rest of the world is incredibly right wing, or at least incredibly different*) would tend to have had to justify everything it does, though it seems most US politics these days has since become a complete circus so now everything needs to be justified all the time.

*no UK right wing party would care about getting rid of national healthcare (such a thing would be political suicide, indeed the most likely next UK prime minister kind of had funding it as a slogan during the leave the EU campaign), gun rights are not a thing most are concerned with (indeed you could happily be a right wing UK politico and want to make things harder for gun owners without any real pushback**), outside of Ireland nobody cares at all about abortion really (some might have personal views but they will not be expressed unless pushed and nobody will really push), the rough equivalent of states rights internally in the UK would be devolved parliaments and those tend to be fairly agreed upon across the board (EU stuff, so called Euroscepticism is predominantly a UK right wing affair but not always), military wise then it is not a particularly good thing to make as your base platform or major talking point (and in any case is not a particularly left or right centric issue) and most just want it done properly***, the only reason anybody would mention communism is if they are talking about history or somewhere else in the world, lowering taxes is a minor note for most parties... and that is pretty much every topic I saw done to death in the US elections I was running around there to witness.

**and if they made it harder for the man on the street but helped the gun club/collector/existing infrastructure set then probably complete non issue.

***the new aircraft carrier stuff (all the old ones were long in the tooth so nice new one was made, but it is overrun and technically the UK is now without one, being a point of contention for everybody involved. Similar grumbles about a lack of helicopters and everybody that was not holding one had a little giggle at the earlier revisions of the L85, and those more in the know might have wondered why it got to A3 rather than being replaced as per the original timelines.

All South America and the Middle East is incredibly socially conservative. I am pretty sure the same goes to Asia. I am sharing my anecdotal experience from what I saw on GBAtemp, doesn't mean everyone saw the same things. All the mods here are liberal for example.

 

[Lacius]

Most of the candidates had their ups and downs during the two debates (some had more ups; some had more downs). Personally, I like Elizabeth Warren most.

 

[Deleted-401606]

Warren and Castro were the winners from night one I think. Harris and Buttigieg in night two. Biggest losers were de Blasio on night one and Biden on night two. Most of the other candidates' performances were just okay, probably not gonna move the needle much for them in either direction. Ryan, Delaney, and Williamson have no reason to be in this race whatsoever.


Well that just sounds like you're trying to sabotage us, lol. Biden I think is the least electable of the big name candidates. He's the Hillary Clinton of this election. Too much baggage, and too moderate to bring the base to the polls. Not to mention he's already lost three presidential primary races.


There are far more registered Democrats than Republicans. I think if 2016 taught us anything, it's that moderates will turn out to vote for a progressive, but progressives will not turn out to vote for a moderate. Just puts fuel on the "both parties are the same" fire when we run 'Republican Lite' candidates like Biden.

Moderates voted for Trump in 2016.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Stop conflating conservatism and hard right either bordering on or just blatant open nationalism and racism and all the other crap you're finding on this forum apart from when you're not talking about video games.
People aren't getting attacked for 'well old values have some place in today's world too', they're being attacked for arguing bullshit about overpopulation or that Mexicans deserve dying like dogs in needlessly expensive desert concentration camps or that 'Antifa and the radical left' are much much much more dangerous than proud boys and other white pride organizations, when one has been killing people and is marching on a common believe that killing more is a good idea.

Like, come on. Also 95%? Jesus you guys love your victim role, don't you?


Because it isn't. The adults in the room maybe, but with the influx of obvious baiting right wing trolls and hordes of 13 year old edge lords who literally have no idea what they're talking about, it's more likely to be leaning to the right here

Didn't you get your posts deleted a few weeks ago because you couldn't help yourself from insulting the user base of this forum? Why do you post in these threads if you don't have the temperament or the emotional maturity for these discussions. As soon as I saw the little anime stuffed animal I knew who you were without even reading your username. These political threads clearly aren't for you. You can't even type a proper sentence and those "concentration camps" where built since Clinton was in power. Your reply had absolutely nothing to do with anything that was discussed on this thread.

 

[Lacius]

Moderates voted for Trump in 2016.

I don't have a problem with your comment about moderates in 2016. That being said, your map is misleading, since not all counties have the same number of people. This map, adjusted for population, is far more accurate, and one should keep in mind that Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes.

 

[Deleted-401606]

I don't have a problem with your comment about moderates in 2016. That being said, your map is misleading, since not all counties have the same number of people. This map, adjusted for population, is far more accurate, and one should keep in mind that Clinton won the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes.

View attachment 171577

Why is my map misleading? In the USA we use the electoral college, not popular vote.

 

[Lacius]

Why is my map misleading? In the USA we use the electoral college, not popular vote.

Because:

1. Your point had nothing to do with the Electoral College.
2. If your point had to do with the Electoral College, a county map is irrelevant.

 

[leon315]

HERE YOU GO! i don't care about 2020 race, i just found this funny

 

[Glyptofane]

I wanted to watch, but was too drunk both nights by the time they started.

Glad to hear Tulsi Gabbard did well and is now polling well despite media attacks.