GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently September 21 19, 6:59 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: August 28 19, 10:12 am 
Offline
MLB.TV Customer Support
User avatar

Joined: July 3 06, 2:19 pm
Posts: 8262
Location: Indianapolis
I found today's 538 chat interesting/relevant. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ho ... 538twitter

It seems Biden's sliding support is going to Harris and Bernie and Warren's growing support is coming from Harris and Bernie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 10:25 am 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
vinsanity wrote:
I found today's 538 chat interesting/relevant. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ho ... 538twitter

It seems Biden's sliding support is going to Harris and Bernie and Warren's growing support is coming from Harris and Bernie.


So by November 2020 it makes sense those voters will have gone:
Biden -> Harris/Sanders -> Warren

There's something in the same chat...

Quote:
nrakich: Yeah, Sanders does not appear to be interested in expanding his coalition; he’s pretty much been stuck polling in the same 15-to-18 percent range since Biden entered the race, whereas Warren has been steadily winning people over. According to The Economist, only 38 percent of Democrats are considering voting for Sanders, whereas 49 percent are considering voting for Warren … which is even (slightly) more than the 48 percent who are considering voting for Biden!


...that makes me wonder. How do they know Biden voters go to Harris/Sanders, and Harris/Sanders to Warren? I mean, Harris/Sanders are basically stuck in neutral, polling right where they were 3 months ago, while Biden is way down and Warren is way up. What supports the claim that the migration of poll respondents stops at the rest stop of Harris/Sanders on the way to Warren?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 12:29 pm 
Offline
MLB.TV Customer Support
User avatar

Joined: July 3 06, 2:19 pm
Posts: 8262
Location: Indianapolis
33anda3rd wrote:
How do they know Biden voters go to Harris/Sanders, and Harris/Sanders to Warren? I mean, Harris/Sanders are basically stuck in neutral, polling right where they were 3 months ago, while Biden is way down and Warren is way up. What supports the claim that the migration of poll respondents stops at the rest stop of Harris/Sanders on the way to Warren?

1. They don't say they know it
2. They don't say it's always that way
3. They explain it

They took polls after the first debates to track who people supported before and after. About half of those who left Biden went to Harris and Sanders - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... came-from/ Even tho Biden and Sanders couldn't be more different on policy.

So why would they go to Sanders and not Harris? There's polling that suggests sexism is playing a role.

There's polls about candidates second choices - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/la ... c-primary/ Unsurprising to see Biden/Bernie and Harris/Warren coupled there.

So, if Warren is the least likely to be the second choice of a Biden supporter and Biden's support is falling it would suggest the majority voters are going to Bernie/Harris. If that's the case, why have those two maintained in the polls? Could it be they are losing supporters in equal numbers to Warren?

There's obviously other explanations - maybe some of those with Warren as a third or fourth have been impressed and she leap frogged; maybe only those who had Warren as a second choice from Biden are jumping ship but I don't think that seems likely.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 4:28 pm 
Offline
Don't tone police me bro!
User avatar

Joined: July 1 06, 7:24 pm
Posts: 10486
Location: Lost in the Cloud
33 got his wish lol


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 5:42 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
Schlich wrote:
33 got his wish lol


Gurl bye.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 6:41 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm
Posts: 24339
She wasn't a great candidate and I've got a few problems with her, though I did like her early on. She started moving left on a number of things well before other Senators and before she started running. She backed single payer (along with Warren) before most of the Senators who cosponsored Bernie's bill. Endorsed Abolish ICE, which is still not popular among elected officials. Also the only Senator to vote against every single one of Trump's appointees, if I'm not mistaken. To me her stance on Franken seems like a matter of principle and the way she explains it I believe it.

Also really liked this answer on white privilege, which I think I posted before when she said it, but will again.

Quote:
Gillibrand: So, I understand that families in this community are suffering deeply. I am fully hear from you and folks that I’ve talked to just in a few minutes that I’ve been here, that is devastating when you’ve lost your job, you’ve lost your ability to provide for your kids, that when you put 20, 30 years into a company that all of the sudden doesn’t care about you or won’t call you back and gives you a day to move. That is not acceptable and not okay. So no one in that circumstance is privileged on any level, but that’s not what that conversation is about.

Question: What is it about?

Gillibrand: I’m going to explain.

What the conversation is about is when a community has been left behind for generations because of the color of their skin. When you’ve been denied job, after job, after job because you’re black or because you’re brown. Or when you go to the emergency room to have your baby. The fact that we have the highest maternal mortality rate and if you are a black woman you are four times more likely to die in childbirth because that healthcare provider doesn’t believe you when you say I don’t feel right. Because he doesn’t value you. Or because she doesn’t value you.

So institutional racism is real. It doesn’t take away your pain or suffering. It’s just a different issue. Your suffering is just as important as a black or brown person’s suffering but to fix the problems that are happening in a black community you need far more transformational efforts that targeted for real racism that exists every day.

So if your son, is 15 years old and smokes pot. He smokes pot just as much as black boy in his neighborhood and the Latino boy in his neighborhood. But that black and brown boy is four times more likely to get arrested. When he’s arrested that criminal justice system might require him to pay bail. 500 bucks. That kid does not have 500 bucks he might not be able to make bail. As an adult with a child at home and he’s a single parent, if he is thrown in jail no one is with his child. It doesn’t matter what he says, I have to go home, I have a child at home, he’s only 12. What am I going to do. It doesn’t matter.

Imagine as a parent how you would feel so helpless. That’s institutional racism. Your son will likely not have to deal with that because he is white. So when someone says white privilege, that is all they are talking about. That his whiteness will mean that a police officer might give him a second chance. It might mean that he doesn’t get incarcerated because he had just smoked a joint with his girlfriend. It might mean that he won’t have to post bail. It means he might be able to show up to work the next day and lose his job and not be in the cycle of poverty that never ends. That’s all it is.

But it doesn’t mean that [doesn’t] deserve my voice, lifting up your challenge. It also doesn’t mean that black and brown people are left to fight these challenges on their own. A white woman like me who is a senator and running for president of the United States. Has to lift up their voice just as much as I would lift up yours. That’s all it means. It doesn’t take away from you at all. It just means we have to recognize suffering in all its forms and solve it in each place intentionally and with knowledge about what we are up against.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 8:26 pm 
Offline
http://tinyurl.com/2e4x5hy

Joined: April 15 06, 6:25 pm
Posts: 24838
Location: St. Louis
What are the chances that either Sanders or Warren drops out of the race in order to avoid a Biden nomination?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 8:37 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
planet planet wrote:
What are the chances that either Sanders or Warren drops out of the race in order to avoid a Biden nomination?


Warren is going to win so there's no chance she drops.

You can quote me on that.


Last edited by 33anda3rd on August 29 19, 8:33 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 28 19, 8:41 pm 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
ghostrunner wrote:
She wasn't a great candidate and I've got a few problems with her, though I did like her early on. She started moving left on a number of things well before other Senators and before she started running.


We've jostled on her a bit the last couple days, and I'll leave you with this. When Warren was testifying before the Senate to protect working class families from predatory consumer lending and the awfulness of the bankruptcy process in 2005, Gillibrand was a corporate lawyer inspired by Hillary Clinton to get involved in party politics. People can correctly point out that Warren used to be Republican, yet Warren the former Republican has been on the side of the correct progressive stuff since Gillibrand was a corporate attorney.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: August 29 19, 8:33 am 
Offline
Replies Authoritatively
User avatar

Joined: April 7 13, 9:45 am
Posts: 7462
Location: Chicago, IL
33anda3rd wrote:
planet planet wrote:
What are the chances that either Sanders or Warren drops out of the race in order to avoid a Biden nomination?


Warren is going to win so there's no chance she drops.

You can quote me on that.


To piggyback on this....

Traditionally, people who have long ties to the party and who have the opportunity to advance their career via appointments to cabinet positions and such will get out earlier than later, once the writing is on the wall and it's clear they can't win. It's bad for the party to keep up the face of a large divided field with an election coming up, and it's good for the party to narrow the field and get out of the way when someone clearly has the nomination wrapped up as a show to voters of unity and strength in the party. Sticking around too long when you're clearly beat is a bad career move if your career requires the favor of the party.

Correspondingly, so far a former governor of a big swing state who will run for Senate, a 53 year old US Senator, a 40 year old US Congressman, a current Governor of a big-ish state who is the leader on green policy, a smart and handsome 39 year old California Congressman on his sixth term have all dropped out. Not Williamson, not Sestak, not Yang, not any of the more iconoclastic candidates who are running with little to no party ties. (I'm not counting Gravel's non-candidacy candidacy.) Those non-party candidates don't need to win favor that leads to an appointment as ambassador to Belgium, so they will stay in as long as they absolutely can. Doesn't matter to Williamson--she's not a Democrat and Democrats dislike her strongly, which they should, they can't have an anti-vaxxer repping them on debate stages it's bad optics for the party not diversity of views. She will stay in until the money runs out then will stay in a bit longer. For Williamson, her ego > beating Trump with a unified party. All you need is love. Bum-ba-bum-ba-bum.

Sanders won't drop out. He should have been out after Super Tuesday last time when he was mathematically eliminated beyond any doubt outside some Seth Abramson Sanders Fan Fiction. Instead he stayed to soften up Clinton and the party, but he doesn't give a damn. He doesn't give a damn about preserving the strength of the party when it's the only real line of defense vs the GOP. He doesn't give a damn that he made the party less unified vs Trump last time. He just gives a damn about his issues. He won't drop, he'll stay in until the bitter end, just like last time. Sanders did not concede and did not endorse Clinton until mid-July last time, after all the primaries and two weeks before the convention. The Bernie Bros had to be scolded by a comedian at the convention for booing Hillary. There is a lot of great stuff in this movement of Bernie's, but there's a lot bad and him not being able to drag his old ass off the stage when he's beat and do the right thing for the world is one of those bad things. By mid-March last time Sanders should have been out of the race and on CNN every day telling people why Clinton was the only morally correct choice in that election.

Bennet, Ryan, Delaney should be the next bunch out--boring white moderate men who could score a juicy ambassador gig.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 134 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group