2020 Election - Catch-all Thread

54,232 Views | 1587 Replies | Last: 1 day ago by Another Bear
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Bloomberg is in because we need a return to normalcy

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4UokjLmsoFhKq0f0Edpbih06QyZupoA7xchoMSX0dfh6FgZHKNQ&s






Michael .1% Bloomberg can go to hell.
Heck, I was about to come over here to suggest you Dems may finally have something going. Went down MB's positions on all sectors, and he sounds electable, maybe even drawing away a number of evil Republicans. Ah, but then even his own party wishes hell upon him. I better just stick with the FB and BB boards. The homogeny of thought here gives one stomach acid.
Well the thing with Mike Bloomberg is it's difficult to tell which party he's in, given he's switched a few times. He's gong to enter the Alabama Democratic primary...but was a GOP as mayor of NYC? At this point I'd say he has some good policy positions for people...but it's difficult to tell exactly what he stands for besides lowering sugar and tobacco consumption. Economy-wise, he's a .1%'er. He can't win.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

Another Bear said:

Q: Which Democratic Candidates are National Security Employees Opening Their Wallets for?
A: Bernie, the Mayor Pete. Bernie more than doubles Trump.

Very interesting results...like government workers want a socialist.



https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/11/08/2020-presidential-election-democratic-candidates-national-security-employees-contributions/




National security employees, huh. I sense a trend.
1. White man
2. White man
3. White woman
4. White man
5. White man
6. Minority woman
7. Minority man
8. White woman
9. White woman
10. Minority man
Interesting take, perhaps more than a little truth...or they want socialist. In any case, interesting that national security types liked Obama over McCain, because he was a "steady Eddie", vs. combustible McCain. Could be sexism too. I'm guessing security types can interact with women on a daily level...but maybe not so much when dealing spooks, nukes and other weirdness.
Professor Turgeson Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Bloomberg is in because we need a return to normalcy

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4UokjLmsoFhKq0f0Edpbih06QyZupoA7xchoMSX0dfh6FgZHKNQ&s
Michael .1% Bloomberg can go to hell.
Heck, I was about to come over here to suggest you Dems may finally have something going. Went down MB's positions on all sectors, and he sounds electable, maybe even drawing away a number of evil Republicans. Ah, but then even his own party wishes hell upon him. I better just stick with the FB and BB boards. The homogeny of thought here gives one stomach acid.
Always nice to get Republican input on what Democrats should do.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bloomberg should run as an independent. If he spends enough you can pretty much guarantee a win for the democrat. All he has to do is target republicans on Facebook. He could easily get 2-3% of the vote in battleground states which would create a landslide for any of the Dems.
OaktownBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OdontoBear66 said:

Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Bloomberg is in because we need a return to normalcy

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4UokjLmsoFhKq0f0Edpbih06QyZupoA7xchoMSX0dfh6FgZHKNQ&s






Michael .1% Bloomberg can go to hell.
Heck, I was about to come over here to suggest you Dems may finally have something going. Went down MB's positions on all sectors, and he sounds electable, maybe even drawing away a number of evil Republicans. Ah, but then even his own party wishes hell upon him. I better just stick with the FB and BB boards. The homogeny of thought here gives one stomach acid.


Trump won the Midwest by promising to forward conservative Christian policies and by falsely promising to help the coal miners and factory workers fight against Wall Street, immigration and globalization. So you think a pro choice socially liberal Jewish candidate from NY who will run on free trade taking their soda away and everything Wall Street likes is going to get their votes? He might be electable if George Will decides.

I like his voice in politics and I wish there were more socially liberal, fiscally conservative candidates out their, though that is not my ideology. But there just ain't a lot out there.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The latest New Hampshire Poll:

https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/nh/nh11112019_nhvr38.pdf/

Things I find interesting:

1. Biden leads with 20%, Warren second at 16%, Buttigieg third at 15%, and Sanders 4th at 14%.
2. Sanders polls at 4th (though is within 2% of Warren (2) and Buttigieg (3).
3. Tulsi is in 5th at 6%?!?! Her and Williamson are the two Democrats I don't like.
4. The people who consider themselves somewhat liberal are exactly split between the main four front runners (at 21%).
5. Buttigieg is second in rural areas (to Biden), and leads with people that make over 100k.
6. Yang does comparatively well with suburban voters at 7% (I thought his proposals would be playing best in the cities or countryside). He is also doing well with the youth vote (tied for 3rd with Biden at 12%).
7. Sanders leads with the youth at 29%.
8. The Independent vote is as follows: Biden 16%, Sanders & Buttigieg 14%, Warren & Tulsi 10%, Yang 5%.
9. Finally in the excitement category splitting the categories in two groups of Extremely/Very excited versus Not that excited or N/A: Biden had 49% excited 16% not, Sanders 67% excited to 10% not, Warren 65% to 4%, and Buttigieg 57% to 4%.
Professor Turgeson Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Things I find interesting - anyone who looks at a single poll and tries to derive meaning from it.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Professor Turgeson Bear said:

Things I find interesting - anyone who looks at a single poll and tries to derive meaning from it.
Agreed. Look at the aggregates. They haven't changed much in the last few weeks.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Professor Turgeson Bear said:

Things I find interesting - anyone who looks at a single poll and tries to derive meaning from it.


Because new information should not be evaluated?

I agree that you should not go overboard and believe it means everything (much like fan overreaction to whatever happened last game), but it should at least be considered.
kelly09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Professor Turgeson Bear said:

OdontoBear66 said:

Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Bloomberg is in because we need a return to normalcy

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4UokjLmsoFhKq0f0Edpbih06QyZupoA7xchoMSX0dfh6FgZHKNQ&s
Michael .1% Bloomberg can go to hell.
Heck, I was about to come over here to suggest you Dems may finally have something going. Went down MB's positions on all sectors, and he sounds electable, maybe even drawing away a number of evil Republicans. Ah, but then even his own party wishes hell upon him. I better just stick with the FB and BB boards. The homogeny of thought here gives one stomach acid.
Always nice to get Republican input on what Democrats should do.
What would Meatloaf do is the question.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
kelly09 said:

Professor Turgeson Bear said:

OdontoBear66 said:

Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Bloomberg is in because we need a return to normalcy

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4UokjLmsoFhKq0f0Edpbih06QyZupoA7xchoMSX0dfh6FgZHKNQ&s
Michael .1% Bloomberg can go to hell.
Heck, I was about to come over here to suggest you Dems may finally have something going. Went down MB's positions on all sectors, and he sounds electable, maybe even drawing away a number of evil Republicans. Ah, but then even his own party wishes hell upon him. I better just stick with the FB and BB boards. The homogeny of thought here gives one stomach acid.
Always nice to get Republican input on what Democrats should do.
What would Meatloaf do is the question.

Easy answer:

Anything for love.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

kelly09 said:

Professor Turgeson Bear said:

OdontoBear66 said:

Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Bloomberg is in because we need a return to normalcy

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT4UokjLmsoFhKq0f0Edpbih06QyZupoA7xchoMSX0dfh6FgZHKNQ&s
Michael .1% Bloomberg can go to hell.
Heck, I was about to come over here to suggest you Dems may finally have something going. Went down MB's positions on all sectors, and he sounds electable, maybe even drawing away a number of evil Republicans. Ah, but then even his own party wishes hell upon him. I better just stick with the FB and BB boards. The homogeny of thought here gives one stomach acid.
Always nice to get Republican input on what Democrats should do.
What would Meatloaf do is the question.

Easy answer:

Anything for love.
But he wouldn't do that.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.