Kansas Crimson

it strikes me as the political landscape continuing to be dominated by the boomers?

and yea, it's mind-boggling that the dems couldn't produce a single not-too-old moderate with a scintilla of charisma.

just about any change from trump would be good change

(Tdub, you know that Biden =\= trump, so why even say something like that?)

ousdahl wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:58 am it strikes me as the political landscape continuing to be dominated by the boomers?

and yea, it's mind-boggling that the dems couldn't produce a single not-too-old moderate with a scintilla of charisma.

They did. People didn't vote for him.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:58 am it strikes me as the political landscape continuing to be dominated by the boomers?

and yea, it's mind-boggling that the dems couldn't produce a single not-too-old moderate with a scintilla of charisma.

the boomers are the only ones pretty much guaranteed to vote

i’d wager that they also are disproportionately represented in polling/surveys

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:11 am just about any change from trump would be good change

(Tdub, you know that Biden =\= trump, so why even say something like that?)

Sure Biden doesnt equal trump. But Biden DOES equal the norm. I wouldnt qualify electing Biden as wanting change. He is the exact same candidate that has been run in elections my entire life.

If you were to say people want a return to the norm then I would say youre probably right.

People elected trump because they wanted change from the long lines of career politicians....its hasnt worked out great in many areas. It probably has gotten more people involved in politics and has caused more people to think about things.

There were really only two lanes that democratic presidential hopefuls could run in this year, leftist, and moderate liberal.

Bernie dominated the leftest lane, especially after Warren couldn't handle a question about how she planned to pay for universal health care, while somehow he was given a pass on how he'd pay for his. Also, Bernie's plan to motivate a large segment of heretofore apathetic young voters to support him didn't come to fruition, which ceded power to the other large democratic voting block, hey "boomers".

That left the moderate liberal lane to the rest of the pack, where Biden was the heavy, heavy, early favorite. Being such a favorite, I think there's no doubt it discouraged a number of other moderates from running at all, like possibly Senator Sherrod Brown, of Ohio. There were still a number of moderates to choose from, but since Delaney, Gov. Bullock of Mt., Gillibrand, Booker, Hickenlooper, Bennet, Harris, Pete, all failed to gain enough steam, Biden rose from the near dead, and got the nomination. It's also very interesting to me that neither Harris or Booker seemed to cut into Biden's support among Blacks.

IMO, Biden coming back and breaking out like he did says more about voters, unfortunately, than it does about him. Did a majority of democrats suddenly decide that they didn't support Bernie's "free" tuition, etc., policies, &/or, that they didn't, or did they think other Americans weren't ready to elect a self-proclaimed "socialist"? Probably both.

No doubt Biden also benefits from the dumpster fire currently in the WH, so in that since, although it would be difficult to cast anyone in a more "inside DC" role than him, under the circumstances, Americans feel more drawn to how things used to be, than how they currently are, or would be with a "change" candidate, like Bernie.

TDub wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 10:24 am People elected trump because they wanted change from the long lines of career politicians....its hasnt worked out great in many areas.

Ya think! This is not directed at you particularly, but this is the stupidest argument in politics and it's been going on for decades since I have been following politics. No one says "A career-oncologist treated my uncle when he had glioblastoma and he died. I want to make a change because I didn't like the outcome last time".

What we have now is a result of the stupid people reaching a critical mass, or enough of the smart people staying away. People are dying because of it. You can call it elitist or whatever, but there is no way to sweep away the fact that this situation was exactly what the warnings were about before the 2016 election.

I think politics and oncology are slightly different. I do think its ok to be tired of the political options presented and choose a different path.

And, just because it didnt work doesnt mean we should go back to joe fucking biden as our only other option.

Two out of the three last successful Democratic presidents have been governors. I don't think that is accidental, as governors can converse on a much broader basis than the individual Senators who are often quite vocal in one or two areas. Governors can also point to actual programs from their states and are likely better at building a campaign team that doesn't have ideological or political blinders.

Trouble this time around was that Democrats had no governors who had a high profile or the crises that generate those. Democrats should give up on the endless parade of Senators who just talk a lot and generate plans that no one expects will get passed into signed legislation.

TDub wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:30 am I think politics and oncology are slightly different. I do think its ok to be tired of the political options presented and choose a different path.

And, just because it didnt work doesnt mean we should go back to joe fucking biden as our only other option.

A clear case of making perfect be the enemy of the good. "Cankles!" is how we ended up with a chimpanzee flying an A380. At least Joe has experience with a rudder and stick, in this example! He's not going to crash it into the nearest major-population-center, thus ensuring maximum damage.

I do disagree that politics and oncology are slightly different in this context. It's an unfortunate outcome of listening to the likes of anti-government politicans like Newt et al (who haven't worked a day outside of politics, FTR). As one guy put it: "This is what we get when we act upon the ideas of who a stupid person thinks is a smart person".

If you truly believe that new blood is what is needed then begin by getting rid of the Most Dangerous Man in USA - Mitch McConnell. Why are he and his cronies (Lindsay Graham, Chuck Grassley et al) exempt from your "bring in the outsiders" mantra? Put your money where your mouth is!

We're in an age of low-information voters being a majority. Because of that we end up with whoever has most name recognition. And hence these choices.

Mjl wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:14 pm We're in an age of low-information voters being a majority. Because of that we end up with whoever has most name recognition. And hence these choices.

lotta truth

Mjl wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:14 pm We're in an age of low-information voters being a majority. Because of that we end up with whoever has most name recognition. And hence these choices.

Well, Hillary received 3 Million more votes than Trump. So the people spoke loudly. And Trump definitely had the name recognition.

chiknbut wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 6:01 pm

Mjl wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:14 pm We're in an age of low-information voters being a majority. Because of that we end up with whoever has most name recognition. And hence these choices.

Well, Hillary received 3 Million more votes than Trump. So the people spoke loudly. And Trump definitely had the name recognition.

Over Clinton? Not sure about that.

Moreso talking about the primaries. When you're already the pub or dem candidate, you'll have plenty of name recognition

TDub wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 11:30 am I think politics and oncology are slightly different. I do think its ok to be tired of the political options presented and choose a different path.

And, just because it didnt work doesnt mean we should go back to joe fucking biden as our only other option.

The Republican Party is more than welcome to nominate a different candidate.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 9:58 am it strikes me as the political landscape continuing to be dominated by the boomers?

and yea, it's mind-boggling that the dems couldn't produce a single not-too-old moderate with a scintilla of charisma.

They could have but voters in the primaries were too scared of that person losing to Trump. We have to get this moron out of the Oval Office.

When the fuck were we ever in the era of "high-information" voters?

The "low-information voter" trope is trotted out every time someone from the other team wins, because it helps soothe the losers' egos.

Well...uhh...we lost, but only because they're dumb!

ALL eras are eras of low-information voters because MOST people have better things to do than sit around and fixate on politics.

Additionally, basing a campaign on overtly telling your opponents' voters that they're dumb has never worked. 2010, 2014, and 2016 -- that is to say three of the last five election cycles -- are examples of how well that's worked recently.

Frankly, the only reason Trump is still viable politically is because most people in the country find it fucking annoying when assholes with $24,000 fridges stocked with $13/pint ice cream tell them that they're stupid.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:49 pm Frankly, the only reason Trump is still viable politically is because most people in the country find it fucking annoying when assholes with $24,000 fridges stocked with $13/pint ice cream tell them that they're stupid.

"I see your stupid and raise you TWO stupids" - still doesn't take away the fact (your admission) that Trump voters are stupid. Just that there are also other stupid people.

zsn wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 5:03 pm

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 3:49 pm Frankly, the only reason Trump is still viable politically is because most people in the country find it fucking annoying when assholes with $24,000 fridges stocked with $13/pint ice cream tell them that they're stupid.

"I see your stupid and raise you TWO stupids" - still doesn't take away the fact (your admission) that Trump voters are stupid. Just that there are also other stupid people.

Nah. They just don't obsess about politics.

Low-information =/= stoopid.