EPTMore than that, though, I get the impression that Biden has been campaigning in South Carolina really hard lately. He went there instead of campaigning in New Hampshire, and he apparently has been pushing that win much harder than he's looked to the Super Tuesday states. All that just to recover the ground he lost from failing in Iowa and NH. The predictions seem to suggest this "gigantic" Biden margin will put him back into almost frontrunner status, but I suspect it's more that these predictions are all just severely overfitted. There was never a point where Biden's numbers in SC were unfavorable.
2020 Democratic Nominees - Page 43
| Forum Index > Closed |
If this thread turns into a USPMT 2.0, we will not hesitate to shut it down. Do not even bother posting if all you're going to do is shit on the Democratic candidates while adding nothing of value. Rules: - Don't post meaningless one-liners. - Don't turn this into a X doesn't stand a chance against Trump debate. - Sources MUST have a supporting comment that summarizes the source beforehand. - Do NOT turn this thread into a Republicans vs. Democrats shit-storm. This thread will be heavily moderated. Expect the same kind of strictness as the USPMT. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
More than that, though, I get the impression that Biden has been campaigning in South Carolina really hard lately. He went there instead of campaigning in New Hampshire, and he apparently has been pushing that win much harder than he's looked to the Super Tuesday states. All that just to recover the ground he lost from failing in Iowa and NH. The predictions seem to suggest this "gigantic" Biden margin will put him back into almost frontrunner status, but I suspect it's more that these predictions are all just severely overfitted. There was never a point where Biden's numbers in SC were unfavorable. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9182 Posts
On February 28 2020 22:06 Simberto wrote: So, since we are already talking about this: I am pretty annoyed by this need to always talk about Greta Thunberg. To me, the whole focus onto the person as opposed to the message looks like an attempt to do the thing the right really loves to do. Always talk about people, never talk about issues. If you dig deep enough, you will always find something about some person that enough people can dislike. And if you only focus on that, you can avoid ever talking about the actual problems, where you might have a harder time defending your positions. They had a hard time doing this with climate change and the Fridays for Future movement. But now the rightwing climate deniers are always, always focusing on Greta Thunberg so they can do the whole personal mudslinging shit they love to do. And constantly throw out tiny quips at every opportunity to make it less attractive to "be like Greta". I can't understand how you can accuse the right of "always talking about people, never talking about issues" in the context of Greta Thunberg, who got her own personality cult before the right even noticed her existence. It's the left who made her a mascot of the climate change agenda. The shitty memes about her that are polluting the internet now are a kneejerk reaction to the pretty annoying wave of praise she got earlier (and keeps getting) as a person, not as someone "talking about issues". On February 28 2020 23:52 LegalLord wrote: I do wonder how things are going to play out in South Carolina and beyond at this point. Seems like Biden is predicted to win South Carolina by a double digit margin, but... My problem with Biden is that I can't see him maintain a frontrunner status for as long as there are moderate alternatives present in the race. Frontrunners automatically become targets of other candidates, and Biden doesn't sound like someone good at defending himelf. His "high energy" rambling is also very tiring in larger doses. | ||
|
Bourgeois
81 Posts
On February 28 2020 15:52 Bourgeois wrote: Poll: Who do you support now? Bernie (47) Warren (5) Yang (5) Biden (4) Gabbard (4) Bloomberg (3) Buttigieg (2) Klobuchar (1) Steyer (1) 72 total votes Your vote: Who do you support now? (Vote): Bernie Wow, who voted for Bloomberg? I'm actually shocked there are people who would support this guy... For those who would vote for him, what are some of the major policies of his that you support, other than "because he can beat Trump"? | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10121 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Sanders is the leader, and for good reason, but I think a lot of people are just looking at a candidate behind Sanders that has a shot and says stuff they like. For some that's Buttigieg, or Klobuchar, or Biden, or Bloomberg, or Steyer. I can't comment beyond that, since I don't actually support Bloomberg. Stop and frisk, banning soft drinks, and can't even defend his record in debates. I'd sooner see Sanders nominated. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 29 2020 00:50 Danglars wrote: Bloomberg is polling 12-25% in many primaries, and 11-12% nationally. Is it any wonder that someone would go for him in this forum, without resorting to some kind of conspiracy theory? Sanders is the leader, and for good reason, but I think a lot of people are just looking at a candidate behind Sanders that has a shot and says stuff they like. For some that's Buttigieg, or Klobuchar, or Biden, or Bloomberg, or Steyer. I can't comment beyond that, since I don't actually support Bloomberg. Stop and frisk, banning soft drinks, and can't even defend his record in debates. I'd sooner see Sanders nominated. Relative to the crowd here, it’s hard to really get a sense for what kind of person would actually support these second fiddle candidates like Bloomer and Buttman. There is a pretty good sense for what kind of people support Trump, Sanders, Warren, and even Biden, but for those who throw their support behind these worse-regraded candidates, it’s tough to understand who they are. In the abstract, it’s likely if only purely statistically that support for these candidates exists. But it’s hard to go from there to understanding more concretely who these people are. That’s where the surprise element comes in. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7289 Posts
On February 29 2020 00:03 Sent. wrote: I can't understand how you can accuse the right of "always talking about people, never talking about issues" in the context of Greta Thunberg, who got her own personality cult before the right even noticed her existence. It's the left who made her a mascot of the climate change agenda. The shitty memes about her that are polluting the internet now are a kneejerk reaction to the pretty annoying wave of praise she got earlier (and keeps getting) as a person, not as someone "talking about issues". She gets praised as a person... talking about the issues. To consider a young person passionate about preventing climate change being praised as annoying is also utterly baffling to me. How can issues even be presented? Do we need to filter these things through anonymous machines to be allowed to praise things? You could take anyone talking about anything and being praised and say that they’re being praised as a person, and not as someone talking about issues the way you’re applying this to Greta Thunberg. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On February 29 2020 01:04 LegalLord wrote: Relative to the crowd here, it’s hard to really get a sense for what kind of person would actually support these second fiddle candidates like Bloomer and Buttman. There is a pretty good sense for what kind of people support Trump, Sanders, Warren, and even Biden, but for those who throw their support behind these worse-regraded candidates, it’s tough to understand who they are. In the abstract, it’s likely if only purely statistically that support for these candidates exists. But it’s hard to go from there to understanding more concretely who these people are. That’s where the surprise element comes in. Relative to Bernie, Warren support doesn't make sense to me. Relative to how the DNC has screwed and still is trying to screw Bernie out of the nomination (but slowly coming around), I don't fully understand why Sanders isn't polling even higher. But for the relatively moderate lane, compared to Sanders/Warren, I think it comes down to people doing relatively well in this economy. Unemployment down, taxes down for most income earners. Sanders is out there saying everything is awful for all but billionaires, and I expect that rings hollow for people that have improved their lot in life in the past 4 years. If you think about his radical agenda ("It's not radical, it's right!"), if you're part of the 41% that think the country is heading in the right direction, instead of the 50% that think it's heading in the wrong direction, then Sanders will just be more unpalatable than alternatives. Same on the economy--if you're part of the 2/3 that think the economy is working well for you, and the 51% that think Trump's been ok handling the economy, you may not want to upset the apple cart with Sander's economic policies. I don't really think those can be easily dismissed by Sanders fans. I can't really give breakdowns among the non-Sanders-Warren crowd. Pete's got platitudes, Bloomberg at least led a major city, Klobuchar won't alienate middle America, Steyer's i don't know--business savvy green or something?, Biden's been VP to a popular past president. Don't ask me for breakdowns for why some of these lead to the others by 10 points. There is a pretty good sense for what kind of people support Trump, Sanders, Warren, and even Biden, Biden sank a 10 point lead over Sanders in two weeks in Iowa. I think his waning support is ripe for re-examination. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9182 Posts
On February 29 2020 01:11 Zambrah wrote: She gets praised as a person... talking about the issues. To consider a young person passionate about preventing climate change being praised as annoying is also utterly baffling to me. This is the annoying part and it's completely unrelated to the issue she's talking about. The praise she gets is for being who she is, a "passionate young person". Barely anyone would care about her if she was 5 years older. To be clear, I'm not saying there's something wrong with praising someone for presenting the views you agree with. I'm saying the negative reactions focusing on her as a person are a result of the emphasis her fans place on her persnoal traits, so things unrelated to the issues she's talking about. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7289 Posts
On February 29 2020 01:28 Sent. wrote: This is the annoying part and it's completely unrelated to the issue she's talking about. The praise she gets is for being who she is, a "passionate young person". Barely anyone would care about her if she was 5 years older. To be clear, I'm not saying there's something wrong with praising someone for presenting the views you agree with. I'm saying the negative reactions focusing on her as a person are a result of the emphasis her fans place on her persnoal traits, so things unrelated to the issues she's talking about. Is talking about climate change a personal trait though? She wouldn’t be even vaguely remotely popular if all she did was post stupid pics on Instagram, so I it’s hardly some unique personal charisma alone that’s seen her rise to fame. She’s more symbolic then anything, the face of a new generation of kids who are politically active and actually give a shit about the world around them, but at the end of the day there’s no fame or anything without the actual issues she advocates. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On February 29 2020 01:28 Sent. wrote: This is the annoying part and it's completely unrelated to the issue she's talking about. The praise she gets is for being who she is, a "passionate young person". Barely anyone would care about her if she was 5 years older. To be clear, I'm not saying there's something wrong with praising someone for presenting the views you agree with. I'm saying the negative reactions focusing on her as a person are a result of the emphasis her fans place on her persnoal traits, so things unrelated to the issues she's talking about. I find this to be unnecessarily cynical. To understand why someone like her would be praised, understanding the issues and the environment of discourse surrounding it is important. People are praising her because she talks about important issues, but the extra layer, which I think you're misinterpreting, is that she's emblematic of the next generation of Americans, and seeing that our youth are passionate just like we are about issues like this is what's notable and praiseworthy. Getting involved is a brave move that's hard to make, and is genuinely commendable for someone so young to take on. | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
On February 28 2020 23:52 LegalLord wrote: I do wonder how things are going to play out in South Carolina and beyond at this point. Seems like Biden is predicted to win South Carolina by a double digit margin, but... looking back at 2016 it just might not be as impressive as it looks at first glance. The media narrative will of course be one of a blowout victory for Biden, but it's not going to look anything close to the 74% win that Clinton got in 2016 in that state. More than that, though, I get the impression that Biden has been campaigning in South Carolina really hard lately. He went there instead of campaigning in New Hampshire, and he apparently has been pushing that win much harder than he's looked to the Super Tuesday states. All that just to recover the ground he lost from failing in Iowa and NH. The predictions seem to suggest this "gigantic" Biden margin will put him back into almost frontrunner status, but I suspect it's more that these predictions are all just severely overfitted. There was never a point where Biden's numbers in SC were unfavorable. Yeah, not sure if it's good or bad for him that it s just 2-3 days between SC and Super Tuesday. At one hand, Biden could have the momentum, with less chance for him to fuck it up with some embarrassing display once again. On the flip side his campaign and allies will have to work double time to milk that win for all it s worth and more, after 3 terrible finishes. But the trajectory would be pointing up, I mean 5th in Iowa (distant) 2nd in Nevada, 1st in SC, it can be sold as a comeback. I think the percentages are gonna matter a lot. If he wins by double digits than it's an easier sell, if he ekes it out with a couple of a percentages and almost tied delegate numbers, then I dont think it s gonna be enough to build the momentum. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23168 Posts
| ||
|
Sent.
Poland9182 Posts
On February 29 2020 01:41 Zambrah wrote: Is talking about climate change a personal trait though? She wouldn’t be even vaguely remotely popular if all she did was post stupid pics on Instagram, so I it’s hardly some unique personal charisma alone that’s seen her rise to fame. She’s more symbolic then anything, the face of a new generation of kids who are politically active and actually give a shit about the world around them, but at the end of the day there’s no fame or anything without the actual issues she advocates. I think it is a personal trait in this context. As you said, she, the person, is a face (so something you associate with personality and not abstract concepts) of a generation of politically active kids (which is a personal trait) who give a shit ("passionate young people") about climate change instead of stupid pics on Instagram (another personal trait - "wow, she's so mature!"). These are the traits people focus on when praising her. They're not focusing on the specific things she says because those aren't some new or unique takes on climate change, she's using arguments other people used before her. The only thing that makes her stand out is her age, so naturally it's her age that gets the most attention, positive and negative. This is offtopic, so I think I should to stop posting about it here. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16679 Posts
On February 28 2020 15:27 Liquid`Drone wrote: Yeah, we don't have a minimum wage because we have such strong unions that negotiate on behalf of all the workers (non-unionized too) that the 'real minimum wage' is about $20. There are some jobs with private salary negotiation, but normally, that's not even part of a job interview - you are given the pre-negotiated salary all people with your education + years of experience get. minimum wage isn't very strictly enforced in NA. Wage theft is rampant with precious few resources dedicated to preventing it https://www.demos.org/research/steal-urgent-need-combat-wage-theft-retail https://www.epi.org/files/pdf/125116.pdf In the 10 most populous states, 2.4 million workers lose $8 billion annually to minimum wage violations The minimum wage in Ontario, Canada went from $11.40 to $14 two years ago. This fed an already booming underground economy. When you tried to pay someone less than the minimum wage prior to 2018 it was considered a disgusting social faux pas. It was not only illegal it was highly frowned upon. Now, when you pay someone less than minimum wage people just shrug. When I worked at Fedex-Kinkos the assistant manager inserted non-existent "break times" into our shift schedules. An employee reported it to the labour board. Two years later nothing happened with the complaint. As soon as management was informed of his complaint his schedule changed to the most odd-ball working hours imaginable. He had shifts that started at 3am. At the time Fedex-Kinkos, was a world wide company with HQ in the USA. | ||
|
Bourgeois
81 Posts
On February 29 2020 01:28 Sent. wrote: This is the annoying part and it's completely unrelated to the issue she's talking about. The praise she gets is for being who she is, a "passionate young person". Barely anyone would care about her if she was 5 years older. Not true. Look at Al Gore, no one can say he's young and he did an inconvenient truth. Inconveniently for people like you, all his predictions about climate change came true (e.g., ice caps melting) and are the worst crisis happening at the moment, which is why Tom Steyer's message is so important. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16679 Posts
On February 29 2020 02:34 Bourgeois wrote: Not true. Look at Al Gore, no one can say he's young and he did an inconvenient truth. Inconveniently for people like you, all his predictions about climate change came true (e.g., ice caps melting) and are the worst crisis happening at the moment, which is why Tom Steyer's message is so important. Care to outline all of his predictions ? I don't think all of them came true. Many of the basic facts are in dispute. One side will pick the facts that suits their narrative. For example, what is happening with polar bear populations? are they rising or falling? The doom sayers will bring up the declining Polar Bear populations. https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11656-climate-myths-polar-bear-numbers-are-increasing/ Some say increasing polar bear populations mean the ice caps are fine. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/oct/20/susan-crockford-fired-after-finding-polar-bears-th/ | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16679 Posts
On February 29 2020 03:04 JimmiC wrote: None of this seems remotely true to any experience I have had in Canada. Should anyone think that is common. And where I live minimum wage is higher and we are considered more "conservative" province than Ontario. Any complaint I have heard of made to the labour board was taken seriously, fines were issued and paid or businesses were shut down. If that happened to that person they should get a lawyer. I went down this road with CombatEx a couple of years ago. I do not know of a singe internet cafe in a 5 KM radius around Yonge and Bloor in downtown toronto that ever paid its employees minimum wage. Not one. https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/analysis/2017/12/31/what-will-2018-bring-for-the-war-on-wage-theft.html https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/08/02/wage-theft-victims-lost-28m-to-poor-enforcement-statistics-show.html?li_source=LI&li_medium=star_web_ymbii “Moreover, even when violations are validated by the ministry, penalties are rarely imposed on employers and the dispute resolution system provides opportunities for employers to avoid paying employees all that they are owed.” Keep in mind these are proven cases where employers are proven to have fucked over their employees. And, the employees still don't get the money owed to them. My experience with US companies operating in southern Ontario is they employ the same tactics as they do in the USA when committing wage theft. | ||
| ||
