Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

12467…331

Comments

  • #92
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    I read something interesting regarding the democrat primary. If Joe Biden gets the black vote, odds are he just might have the best chance at wining the democratic nomination.

    Here is how it goes:
    If Biden’s black support holds up that long, he will have prevented Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) from locking up the nomination before the convention. Democrats award their delegates according to a candidate’s share of the popular vote, so long as that person received at least 15 percent either statewide or in a congressional district. If Biden has locked up the black vote and former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg and former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg are each breaking 15 percent of the white vote, then Sanders will not have a large delegate lead after four states vote on March 17. More than 61 percent of the delegates will have been awarded by that date; Sanders cannot win the remaining states by large enough margins to give him a majority before the convention.

    This means Biden can go into the convention with a good shot of winning because of his support among the Democratic establishment. These party leaders comprise the uncommitted superdelegates, who also will attend the party convention. They won’t be allowed to vote on the first ballot, but they can vote on any ballot after that if the convention is deadlocked. Biden’s black support will ensure such a deadlock if it holds up, and then the establishment can rally behind the man they always hoped would lead the ticket. Gamblers know that the odds are almost always with the house, and in the Democratic Party, the superdelegates are the house.

    Interesting. By being the establishment candidate, it gives Biden probably the best shot at winning the nomination even though he could be well behind in the votes -- if enough candidates keep ahead of the 15% threshold, that is.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/18/dont-bet-against-joe-biden-just-yet-he-has-an-ace-up-his-sleeve/

    Biden still loses to Trump, but the fact that he could win the democratic nomination being so far behind is rather interesting. Oh, those crazy democrats.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #93
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Trump haters, of course. That would include Democrats and Socialists, Liberals, Progressives, the vast majority of the mainstream media, Hollywood elite, the Deep State, Never-Trumpers, and Grumpy Cat.

    you forgot an elderly asian man who used to be on star trek and being gay is his entire personality.


  • #94
    Hande hoche!
    Registered Users Posts: 7,423 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    Think that article's a bit off as regards Biden's grasp of the black vote. He seems to be dropping support to Bloomberg among blacks.
    Very good point as regards the 15% threshold,if enough candidates are in play on super Tuesday the numbers failing to achieve that percentage could make for some interesting outcomes.

    Should throw in a caveat, that's assuming Bloomberg doesn't make a dog's dinner of the debate.


  • #95
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Watched the Nevada democratic debate last night. Most entertaining debate the democrats have had so far. Mike Bloomberg finally got on stage and he and his billions had a target on his back. The claws were out amongst all the candidates which resulted in the debate turning into a train wreck. Bloomberg did have the best line of the debate, though... “I can't think of a ways that would make it easier for Donald Trump to get re-elected than listening to this conversation.”

    For everyone not a die-hard coastal or urban liberal it was apparent who won the debate... Donald Trump. Even with all his flaws Trump connects with the common man... these clowns on stage don’t.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #96
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    I don’t think in US history we’ve ever had so many viable candidates still in a primary race at this point. How do the candidates not run out of money? The one or two major candidate usually left after Super Tuesday usually have a hoard of funds available for them to use in the general election. But this year democrat candidates are having to spend tons of money just battling each other. Will democrat donors feel the bleeding of their donations needs to stop at some point, as there seems to be a need for constant cash inflows to the 6 viable democrats (Steyer and Gabbard have no chance at this point) right up to the DNC convention? Bloomberg is the only one seemingly in no need of cash as he is willing to spend billions of his own money in this election.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Bloomberg is the only one seemingly in no need of cash as he is willing to spend billions of his own money in this election.

    The benefits of being an actual billionaire.


  • #98
    rossie1977
    Registered Users Posts: 11,341 ✭✭✭✭rossie1977


    notobtuse wrote: »
    I don’t think in US history we’ve ever had so many viable candidates still in a primary race at this point. .

    I count 8. There was still 12 Republicans running on February 1st 2016 and half dropped out by February 20th


  • #99
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    rossie1977 wrote: »
    I count 8. There was still 12 Republicans running on February 1st 2016 and half dropped out by February 20th
    Yes, 8 democrats (technically 6 democrats, a socialist running as an independent, and a independent), but I noted the 2 democrats who had no choice.

    At this point in 2016 there were only 5 GOP candidates still in the race. Trump, Curz, Rubio, Kaisch, and Carson. Jeb Bush had already quit the race. Carson dropped out March 6, and Rubio on March 15. The other 2 gave up on May 3 & 4.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #100
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Elizabeth Warren is out of money after spending heavily. So much so that her campaign had to take out a $3 million loan because they feared she would run out of cash. Reports are Biden's donors are abandoning him. Buttigieg's campaign raised around $6 million in January but spent $14 million that same month. His campaign only had about $6.6 million in the start of February. Now Mike Bloomberg is throwing around money like he has an unlimited supply (which he pretty much does), which causes the other candidates to spend much more on ad purchases then they ever wanted to in order to continue their campaigns. The writing is on the wall, determined by cash, that the democrats choice will either be Bloomberg or Sanders. And neither of them is a democrat! This is crazy. When will democrats realize radical leftism now controls their party, and something needs to be done about it if they wish to remain a viable political party?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #101
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Elizabeth Warren is out of money after spending heavily. So much so that her campaign had to take out a $3 million loan because they feared she would run out of cash. Reports are Biden's donors are abandoning him. Buttigieg's campaign raised around $6 million in January but spent $14 million that same month. His campaign only had about $6.6 million in the start of February. Now Mike Bloomberg is throwing around money like he has an unlimited supply (which he pretty much does), which causes the other candidates to spend much more on ad purchases then they ever wanted to in order to continue their campaigns. The writing is on the wall, determined by cash, that the democrats choice will either be Bloomberg or Sanders. And neither of them is a democrat! This is crazy. When will democrats realize radical leftism now controls their party, and something needs to be done about it if they wish to remain a viable political party?

    Is Bloomberg a "radical leftist" even by American standards? :confused:

    I suppose the democrats could go the way of the Republican Party *.

    * High jacked, gutted and remolded by a former Democrat and turned into The Party of Trump.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Is Bloomberg a "radical leftist" even by American standards? :confused:

    I suppose the democrats could go the way of the Republican Party *.

    * High jacked, gutted and remolded by a former Democrat and turned into The Party of Trump.
    Mike Bloomberg isn't a radical leftist. He's just buying the radical leftists off.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #103
    TheValeyard
    Registered Users Posts: 12,203 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Mike Bloomberg isn't a radical leftist. He's just buying the radical leftists off.

    I dunno, anyone an inch to the left is a radical loonie leftie, anyone an inch to the right, is a far right fascist.

    Well, according to American Internet warriors.

    Fcuk Putin. Glory to Ukraine!



  • #104
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    TheValeyard wrote: »
    I dunno, anyone an inch to the left is a radical loonie leftie, anyone an inch to the right, is a far right fascist.

    Well, according to American Internet warriors.
    Left of center and right of center are still considered moderates. It's the far left and far right that fall into the loonie category. And the far left (by American standards) now comprises the base of the democrat party.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #105
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    And what about Sanders? This article is the most veracious one out there... but beware, it would be considered quite offensive (but on point) to all the Bernie Bros. Then again, a bunch of republicans playing softball is also offensive to them. Bottom line… in the end the democratic party will screw Sanders over.

    https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2020/02/20/you-bernie-suckers-are-going-to-get-fooled-again-n2561582

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #106
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Mike Bloomberg isn't a radical leftist. He's just buying the radical leftists off.

    Exactly what Trump did really.


  • #107
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Exactly what Trump did really.
    No. Hillary Clinton's campiagn spent over double of what Trump's did in 2016 and Trump used very little of his own money. Trump won because people were tired of living under Obama’s foolishness, Trump promised to look out for the forgotten middle class, and Trump promised to blow up the establishment. Mission accomplished. And that is why he will win again.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #108
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    No. Hillary Clinton's campiagn spent over double of what Trump's did in 2016 and Trump used very little of his own money. Trump won because people were tired of living under Obama’s foolishness, Trump promised to look out for the forgotten middle class, and Trump promised to blow up the establishment. Mission accomplished. And that is why he will win again.

    And Putin helped him win.

    You forgot that one.


  • #109
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    And Putin helped him win.

    You forgot that one.
    Russia, Russia, Russia? Dear god... The power of Christ compels you!

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #110
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Russia, Russia, Russia? Dear god... The power of Christ compels you!

    Well it's a fact.

    Drives the Donald his beat me harder please big bad orange man cheer leaders nuts though for some reason. :)


  • #111
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Well it's a fact.

    Drives the Donald his beat me harder please big bad orange man cheer leaders nuts though for some reason. :)
    Listen, I understand denial ain’t just a river in Egypt. When the Russia hoax was finally laid to rest it caused a million democrat-loving tears. (It was glorious... but I digress) And the only recourse for leftists and liberals to hold on to their sanity is to completely ignore and deny it

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Listen, I understand denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.

    That would be The Nile.

    But anyway, Russia did meddle in the 2016 election and are currently meddling in the 2020 election.

    It's an absolute fact.

    Strange that stanch members of the party of law order :) can't admit that.

    We know why Trump won't.


  • #113
    MonkeyTennis
    Registered Users Posts: 3,098 ✭✭✭MonkeyTennis


    Establishment well and truly smashed




    except for Betsy Devos ...

    and Steve Mnuchin

    oh and William Barr


    Oh and Wilbur Ross



    Oh and Elaine Chao


  • #114
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    That would be The Nile.

    But anyway, Russia did meddle in the 2016 election and are currently meddling in the 2020 election.

    It's an absolute fact.

    Strange that stanch members of the party of law order :) can't admit that.

    We know why Trump won't.
    Sure Russia is... as they have always done. But they're simply sowing the seeds of chaos against both republicans and democrats.

    Prove me wrong!

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #115
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    MonkeyTennis wrote: »
    Establishment well and truly smashed




    except for Betsy Devos ...

    and Steve Mnuchin

    oh and William Barr


    Oh and Wilbur Ross



    Oh and Elaine Chao
    Getting rid of the deeply entrenched establishment is proving to be a tough slog. But Trump soldiers on.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #116
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,501 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Sure Russia is... as they have always done. But they're simply sowing the seeds of chaos against both republicans and democrats.

    Prove me wrong!

    Jaysus lad, calm down. It's not my opinion.

    It's the opinion of the Republican led Intelligence Committee just as one example.

    Senate report finds Russia tried to harm Clinton, boost Trump in 2016 election


  • #117
    MonkeyTennis
    Registered Users Posts: 3,098 ✭✭✭MonkeyTennis


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Getting rid of the deeply entrenched establishment is proving to be a tough slog. But Trump soldiers on.

    Didnt he just appoint some millionaire donor to be an ambassador a few days ago? You are delusional


  • #118
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    MonkeyTennis wrote: »
    Didnt he just appoint some millionaire donor to be an ambassador a few days ago? You are delusional
    Trump is doing it intelligently by getting eliminating those who are not necessary and ending the duplication of departments and programs. And it’s being accomplished by getting rid of unnecessary regulations and the massive amount of the democrat stronghold of overpaid bureaucrats who enforce them. The Deep State is currently living in fear.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #119
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    Interesting to see how this one goes , If the Democrats are smart they will put in a candidate that can beat Trump but I see allot of crap online related to identity politics and tearing candidates down because they don't click certain boxes.

    It's almost like they are trying to sabotage themselves.


  • #120
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    Jaysus lad, calm down. It's not my opinion.

    It's the opinion of the Republican led Intelligence Committee just as one example.

    Senate report finds Russia tried to harm Clinton, boost Trump in 2016 election
    And if you look at the demographic characteristics of target voters in key swing states, Russian attempts at interference had no effect on the election results.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #121
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Calhoun wrote: »
    Interesting to see how this one goes , If the Democrats are smart they will put in a candidate that can beat Trump but I see allot of crap online related to identity politics and tearing candidates down because they don't click certain boxes.

    It's almost like they are trying to sabotage themselves.
    It’s already too late in this election for the democrats. Even MSNBC is living in terror of their impending defeat. The democrats best bet is to focus on 2024 when Trump reign ends. America has broken up with the current democratic party. The DNC needs to immediately focus on how they go about getting their party back.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement