Democratic Primary Thread (Updated Poll #2)

[BleedBlueGold]

The latest polling on "free college" is polling at 53%, according to Marist's newest poll. Medicare for All is at 70%. Indeed, many progressive issues are polling above 50%, a hurdle that Trump's job approval rating has yet to clear in any poll during his term. Hell, another recent poll said that 54% of Americans say they wouldn't vote for Trump under any circumstance. While I appreciate that you think some of their ideas are "insane," (I don't agree with them all either) but the notion that you cannot win the general election on a platform that most of the country seems to want strikes me as a bit of an overstatement.

Here are some of the other progressive policy proposals in which people seem to want:

Green New Deal - 63%
Free public tuition at public colleges - 53%
Background checks for gun show purchases - 89%
Medicare for All - 70%
Govt. regulation of prescription drugs - 67%
Pathway to citizenship for those here illegally - 64%
Legalizing marijuana - 63%
Ban on "assault weapons" - 57%
$15 minimum wage - 56%
Rejoin Paris Climate Agreement - 53%
Tax on carbon-based fuels - 50%

Consider that whomever wins this primary is going to be running against an agenda that includes denial of man-made climate change, doing nothing to ease the burden on college tuition, no gun laws of any kind, repealing Obamacare and replacing it with ... well, nothing, only market-based limits big pharma price gouging, locking people in cages on the border, doubling down on the destructive war on drugs, wages too small to live on, being the only nation not cooperating through the Paris Accord, and deregulation of carbon-based fuel. I don't agree with your premise that you cannot win on progressive issues. Evidence points to the opposite conclusion this cycle. It is a different thing altogether, whether the guy who doesn't comb his hair and flails his hands around when he talks, or the woman who speaks breathlessly like she's explaining to first responders how a fire started can win in a general. But people seem to want what they are selling even if they'd rather have a different sales rep.

Not to put words in Lax's mouth, but my guess is his use of "insane" means free college and cancelling student debt won't solve the tuition problem.

On the premise that "the majority of people support these policies, therefore, it could be a winning strategy," I'll agree. However, polling also shows that a majority of Americans are against abortions and are against the liberal PC/#MeToo/identity politics b.s. that Dems sell constantly. Lots of Americans support the 2nd amendment. They're against the war on Christianity perpetrated by the Left. I could go on and on.

There is room for a third party in this country who could represent Americans who feel left behind by the two parties in power.

https://solidarity-party.org/

WHAT WE STAND FOR

We are a party that seeks the common good, on common ground, through common sense. We believe in the sanctity of human life, the necessity of social justice, our responsibility to care for the environment, and promotion of a more peaceful world. We cherish the individual rights and separation of government powers protected by the U.S. Constitution, and recognize the need for social supports and community cohesion. We seek to bridge the bitter partisan divide with principled and respectful policies and dialog.

 

[IrishLax]

The latest polling on "free college" is polling at 53%, according to Marist's newest poll. Medicare for All is at 70%. Indeed, many progressive issues are polling above 50%, a hurdle that Trump's job approval rating has yet to clear in any poll during his term. Hell, another recent poll said that 54% of Americans say they wouldn't vote for Trump under any circumstance. While I appreciate that you think some of their ideas are "insane," (I don't agree with them all either) but the notion that you cannot win the general election on a platform that most of the country seems to want strikes me as a bit of an overstatement.

Here are some of the other progressive policy proposals in which people seem to want:

Green New Deal - 63%
Free public tuition at public colleges - 53%
Background checks for gun show purchases - 89%
Medicare for All - 70%
Govt. regulation of prescription drugs - 67%
Pathway to citizenship for those here illegally - 64%
Legalizing marijuana - 63%
Ban on "assault weapons" - 57%
$15 minimum wage - 56%
Rejoin Paris Climate Agreement - 53%
Tax on carbon-based fuels - 50%

Consider that whomever wins this primary is going to be running against an agenda that includes denial of man-made climate change, doing nothing to ease the burden on college tuition, no gun laws of any kind, repealing Obamacare and replacing it with ... well, nothing, only market-based limits big pharma price gouging, locking people in cages on the border, doubling down on the destructive war on drugs, wages too small to live on, being the only nation not cooperating through the Paris Accord, and deregulation of carbon-based fuel. I don't agree with your premise that you cannot win on progressive issues. Evidence points to the opposite conclusion this cycle. It is a different thing altogether, whether the guy who doesn't comb his hair and flails his hands around when he talks, or the woman who speaks breathlessly like she's explaining to first responders how a fire started can win in a general. But people seem to want what they are selling even if they'd rather have a different sales rep.

Where are you getting these numbers? From what I've seen, very little of this is true.

These figures are as current as last night.

 

[Irish#1]

The latest polling on "free college" is polling at 53%, according to Marist's newest poll. Medicare for All is at 70%. Indeed, many progressive issues are polling above 50%, a hurdle that Trump's job approval rating has yet to clear in any poll during his term. Hell, another recent poll said that 54% of Americans say they wouldn't vote for Trump under any circumstance. While I appreciate that you think some of their ideas are "insane," (I don't agree with them all either) but the notion that you cannot win the general election on a platform that most of the country seems to want strikes me as a bit of an overstatement.

Here are some of the other progressive policy proposals in which people seem to want:

Green New Deal - 63%
Free public tuition at public colleges - 53%
Background checks for gun show purchases - 89%
Medicare for All - 70%
Govt. regulation of prescription drugs - 67%
Pathway to citizenship for those here illegally - 64%
Legalizing marijuana - 63%
Ban on "assault weapons" - 57%
$15 minimum wage - 56%
Rejoin Paris Climate Agreement - 53%
Tax on carbon-based fuels - 50%

Consider that whomever wins this primary is going to be running against an agenda that includes denial of man-made climate change, doing nothing to ease the burden on college tuition, no gun laws of any kind, repealing Obamacare and replacing it with ... well, nothing, only market-based limits big pharma price gouging, locking people in cages on the border, doubling down on the destructive war on drugs, wages too small to live on, being the only nation not cooperating through the Paris Accord, and deregulation of carbon-based fuel. I don't agree with your premise that you cannot win on progressive issues. Evidence points to the opposite conclusion this cycle. It is a different thing altogether, whether the guy who doesn't comb his hair and flails his hands around when he talks, or the woman who speaks breathlessly like she's explaining to first responders how a fire started can win in a general. But people seem to want what they are selling even if they'd rather have a different sales rep.

Where in the world would you get the money to fund all of these?

Locking people in cages? These cages were in place when Obama was POTUS. Tell the Senators and Congressmen to get off their butts and do something. I'm for doubling down on the war on drugs and legalizing weed. Are people really wanting what their selling? The silent moderate dems may not agree.

 

[GoIrish41]

Where are you getting these numbers? From what I've seen, very little of this is true.

These figures are as current as last night.

Latest Marist poll.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/26/8910009/progressive-agenda-popular-decriminalize

 

[GoIrish41]

Where in the world would you get the money to fund all of these?

Locking people in cages? These cages were in place when Obama was POTUS. Tell the Senators and Congressmen to get off their butts and do something. I'm for doubling down on the war on drugs and legalizing weed. Are people really wanting what their selling? The silent moderate dems may not agree.

According to polling, yes, people are wanting what they are selling.

 

[dublinirish]

Where in the world would you get the money to fund all of these?

Locking people in cages? These cages were in place when Obama was POTUS. Tell the Senators and Congressmen to get off their butts and do something. I'm for doubling down on the war on drugs and legalizing weed. Are people really wanting what their selling? The silent moderate dems may not agree.

taxing the 1% i imagine. Sure Jeff Bezos paid more to divorce his wife than it would take to end world hunger

 

[IrishLax]

Not to put words in Lax's mouth, but my guess is his use of "insane" means free college and cancelling student debt won't solve the tuition problem.

On the premise that "the majority of people support these policies, therefore, it could be a winning strategy," I'll agree. However, polling also shows that a majority of Americans are against abortions and are against the liberal PC/#MeToo/identity politics b.s. that Dems sell constantly. Lots of Americans support the 2nd amendment. They're against the war on Christianity perpetrated by the Left. I could go on and on.

There is room for a third party in this country who could represent Americans who feel left behind by the two parties in power.

https://solidarity-party.org/

Yes, and this is what they were discussing on the stage when I was posting.

As people have begun to start earnestly discussing plans for "free" 4-year or 2-year college -- as well as cancelling student debt -- they've also found that the more details you give the more negative the response is.

There is only a 45% approval for free college, and when you add the kicker of "well we'll pay for it by taxing rich people or corporations!" that drops to 41%. So any specificity, at all, and it goes down. You start talking about borrowing money from other programs or taxing people besides the 1%? Support goes even lower.

Similarly, when you say "forgive student loans and pay for it by taxing rich people" it's a 52% loser. Basically, as soon as you stop thinking in abstract and start talking about paying for it (even if the solution is just taxing "the rich!") these ideas become losers VERY quickly. Does anyone not think that's exactly what would happen in a presidential debate or if someone started seriously considering the bill in congress?

A relevant link to the poll numbers: https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2617

My post at the time was about how Klobuchar quite forcefully and eloquently already started hitting on that. So did other people on the stage. And Bernie and Warren really had no answer except to stand there and yell "dream big!" Of course someone like Warren who got paid nearly half a million dollars to teach one class at Harvard doesn't think exploding higher education costs is the real problem...

 

[IrishLax]

Latest Marist poll.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/26/8910009/progressive-agenda-popular-decriminalize

OK so this is my point. Warren quite clearly said that she wants to entirely abolish private health insurance. That's the insane part. A public option is perfectly sane and popular! And that's what the poll reflects --

"Medicare for all that want it, that is allow Americans to choose between a national health insurance program or their own private health insurance."

That is the polar opposite of Warren's and Bernie's position, and is in line with what Klobuchar, Buttigieg, etc. support. The W/B position is a 41% loser in your poll, the "public option" is a winner.

With regard to "free college", see the post I just made. The more information you give on how to pay for it the more it becomes a loser. Devil in the details. I did not see student loan forgiveness listed in your link.

Also, decriminalizing border crossing at 27% in their poll. Reparations 27%. Healthcare program for illegal immigrants 33%. I didn't really get into these, but those are all positions supported by Bernie and why I think it is insane if the ultimate goal is replacing Trump at all costs.

 

[IrishLax]

Also, can everyone please take a second to vote in the poll if you haven't? Way more people participating in this thread than have voted.

 

[GoIrish41]

OK so this is my point. Warren quite clearly said that she wants to entirely abolish private health insurance. That's the insane part. A public option is perfectly sane and popular! And that's what the poll reflects --

"Medicare for all that want it, that is allow Americans to choose between a national health insurance program or their own private health insurance."

That is the polar opposite of Warren's and Bernie's position, and is in line with what Klobuchar, Buttigieg, etc. support. The W/B position is a 41% loser in your poll, the "public option" is a winner.

With regard to "free college", see the post I just made. The more information you give on how to pay for it the more it becomes a loser. Devil in the details. I did not see student loan forgiveness listed in your link.

Also, decriminalizing border crossing at 27% in their poll. Reparations 27%. Healthcare program for illegal immigrants 33%. I didn't really get into these, but those are all positions supported by Bernie and why I think it is insane if the ultimate goal is replacing Trump at all costs.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, Warren or Bernie. My point was that you made an emphatic statement about their policies being too radical to be adopted and I simply pointed out that isn't what most people think, according to the polling I've seen. I did look at yours briefly and it seems as though they were asking different questions, but I will conceded that the more specificity they seemed to dig for the lower the support numbers got. We both know that putting all your eggs in one polling basket is probably not a wise choice. I mostly follow the FiveThirtyEight composite poll.

I can agree with you on the public option. There is no reason to come out strongly against private insurance companies. My perspective is that when people start signing up for the private option it will become clear whether it is better or not. If it is, that public option would necessarily transform into Medicare for All. Nobody is going to pay top dollar for something that they can get at a dramatically subsidized rate.

I'm also against reparations. Not because it isn't a "debt owed" as Ms. Williamson said to great applause last night, but because stroking a check would, in the mind of many, settle the racism debate for all time and it would do nothing to actually address the problem of systemic racism. This isn't something we can just throw money at. It's going to take some real effort. "Decriminalized border crossings" is actually the difference between making crossing the border illegally a criminal offense or a civil offense. I'm not certain about the implications of doing that as I haven't read up on it, but I have heard Castro say that criminalizing it enables the administration to establish a criminal charge against immigrants that can be used to take their children when they cross the border. Again, not sure if that's true, or just his spin.

 

[GoIrish41]

Also, can everyone please take a second to vote in the poll if you haven't? Way more people participating in this thread than have voted.

I didn't vote because I haven't made up my mind. Way too early.

 

[ACamp1900]

I haven't voted because as it stands I will not vote for any of them...

 

[IrishLax]

I didn't vote because I haven't made up my mind. Way too early.

My bad, I should've said this originally. I'm going to refresh the poll every couple months. It's more of a "take the current temperature" kind of poll.

 

[GoIrish41]

My bad, I should've said this originally. I'm going to refresh the poll every couple months. It's more of a "take the current temperature" kind of poll.

In that case, I’ll vote.

 

[Irish YJ]

Polls can be good, and they can be bullsheet. The higher level the question, the more inaccurate the results. Surface type "free sheet" polls typically get positive results. When the question adds the "how", the polls dip.

It's just like the free college question. If you ask if free college is a good thing, a lot of people say yes. Hell, I'm for free college (done the right way). If you say free college and tuition debt forgiveness by raising taxes, I'm a solid no. If you say free BASIC college or job training via State/National Lottery proceeds (similar to Georgia), then I'm a big yes.

Progressives rely on "grow the fed and tax the evil rich" 99% of the time. And it's simply a loser with a lot of folks.

 

[Irish YJ]

I think we're going to see Booker and Harris go after each other tonight. Not sure Harris will go after Joe all that much, but wouldn't be surprised if Booker goes after him.

I think the most diarrhea might come from Mayor Bill tonight. Time for him go all out.

 

[IrishLax]

Round 2!

 

[IrishLax]

De Blasio is such a fucking fraud, and such a fucking tool. How is he even on this stage?

 

[Irish YJ]

De Blasio is such a fucking fraud, and such a fucking tool. How is he even on this stage?

Make NY great again!

 

[IrishLax]

Andrew Yang is a real one.

 

[IrishLax]

Harris getting smacked around, but Biden stuttering too much to real drive his points home. Not a great debater.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Yes, and this is what they were discussing on the stage when I was posting.

As people have begun to start earnestly discussing plans for "free" 4-year or 2-year college -- as well as cancelling student debt -- they've also found that the more details you give the more negative the response is.

There is only a 45% approval for free college, and when you add the kicker of "well we'll pay for it by taxing rich people or corporations!" that drops to 41%. So any specificity, at all, and it goes down. You start talking about borrowing money from other programs or taxing people besides the 1%? Support goes even lower.

Similarly, when you say "forgive student loans and pay for it by taxing rich people" it's a 52% loser. Basically, as soon as you stop thinking in abstract and start talking about paying for it (even if the solution is just taxing "the rich!") these ideas become losers VERY quickly. Does anyone not think that's exactly what would happen in a presidential debate or if someone started seriously considering the bill in congress?

A relevant link to the poll numbers: https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2617

My post at the time was about how Klobuchar quite forcefully and eloquently already started hitting on that. So did other people on the stage. And Bernie and Warren really had no answer except to stand there and yell "dream big!" Of course someone like Warren who got paid nearly half a million dollars to teach one class at Harvard doesn't think exploding higher education costs is the real problem...

Pretty sure that data includes Republicans. I’d be interested to see how center-right and center-left independents feel about these same issues. I do feel there is an extreme (Bernie/Warren) and less extreme candidates. Like you’ve said, the more moderates ones may have a better chance at beating Trump. But will the moderates survive the primary? Time will tell.

Edit: I just saw a HuffPo (of all places) Dem poll retweeted showing that of those who answered, 55% wanted a continuation of Obama policies and 34% wanted something new (presumably Bernie-esque policies).

 

[IrishLax]

Joe Biden strong tonight. Lots of applause, easily deflecting attacks from Kamala Harris and Gillenbrand.

 

[Irish YJ]

I quit watching about 10, but Gabbard stuck the knife in Harris, and Harris didn't even address the slams. She just tried to spin away. Not a good look for her tonight.

Booker still comes off as kinda creepy and imbalanced to me. Gillabrand needs to give it up as do several others. Big fails from DeBlasio and Castro. Yang was decent, but he spoke the least out of all.

IMO, Biden won (at least what I saw).

 

[GATTACA!]

I thought Yang killed it tonight. He was literally the only one up there not slinging mud. He's been dominating every post debate poll I've seen.

Very exciting.

 

[BGIF]

I thought Yang killed it tonight. He was literally the only one up there not slinging mud. He's been dominating every post debate poll I've seen.

Very exciting.

Have you seen any outside of your living room?


https://www.cnn.com/opinions/live-news/opinion-democratic-debate-night-july-31/index.html

6 hr 44 min ago
A Republican ranks the debaters
By Alice Stewart

Here's my ranking of the candidates' performance in the second debate:

1.) Joe Biden

2.) Kamala Harris

3.) Cory Booker

4.) Tulsi Gabbard

5.) Julian Castro

6.) Michael Bennett

7.) Andrew Yang

8.) Kirsten Gillibrand

9.) Jay Inslee

10.) Bill de Blasio



Top five after two nights:

1.) Joe Biden

2.) Elizabeth Warren

3.) Bernie Sanders

4.) Kamala Harris

5.) Cory Booker



Alice Stewart is a CNN political commentator and former communications director for Ted Cruz's 2016 presidential campaign.


6 hr 33 min ago
A Democrat ranks the debaters
By Joe Lockart

Here's my ranking of the candidates' performance in the second debate:

1.) Cory Booker

2.) Joe Biden

3.) Julián Castro

4.) Michael Bennet

5.) Kamala Harris

6.) Kirsten Gillibrand

7.) Jay Inslee

8.) Tulsi Gabbard

9.) Andrew Yang

10.) Bill de Blasio

Top five after two nights:

1.) Cory Booker: he put himself back in the race.

2.) Joe Biden: because no one emerged as his chief rival and he showed he could fight back.

3.) Pete Buttigieg: despite his youth, he seems the most sensible of the pack.

4.) Elizabeth Warren: still a compelling debater, but not sure she took any Bernie voters.

5.) Michael Bennet: because he won’t make the next debate and that’s too bad.

Joe Lockhart was White House press secretary from 1998-2000 in President Bill Clinton's administration. He co-hosts the podcast "Words Matter." Follow him on Twitter at @JoeLockhart


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/31/20749497/2020-democratic-debates-presidential-election-winners-losers-night-two


4 winners and 3 losers from the second night of the July Democratic debates

Winner: Joe Biden

Winner: Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders

Winner: Cory Booker

Winner: single-payer activists




Yang was even mentioned in the Vox writeup. NOT Mentioned.

In the CNN rating, Yang was only mentioned in the Republican List and the Democrat List. No discussion of him.


The NY TIMES said of Yang,

Andrew Yang and Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington were a study in contrasts Wednesday. Two single-issue candidates — one who stuck to his issue throughout the debate, and one who did not.

Mr. Yang brought nearly every one of his answers back to his signature issue: a $1,000 monthly stipend called the universal basic income, and a warning about increasing automation dooming millions of American jobs.

But Mr. Inslee, who has built his campaign around protecting the environment, mentioned climate only when asked by the moderators, skipping on opportunities to inject what he calls the most important issue of the times into discussions about related topics.

The contrast between the two second-tier candidates shows why Mr. Yang has cleared the donor threshold to qualify for the party’s September and October debates and Mr. Inslee remains far behind the fund-raising pace to do so.

FiveThirtyEight: You can find Yang if you do a search. He spoke the fewest words. And he was listed among those who mentioned Trump the least.

 

[Irish#1]

From CNBC.....

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii took on Harris’ record as a prosecutor, a subject that has fueled critiques from progressives.

“There are too many examples to cite, but she put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when asked if she ever smoked marijuana,” Gabbard said. “She kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California, and she fought to keep the tax bail system in place that impacts poor people in the worst kind of way.”

But Harris said that as attorney general of California, she worked to reform the system.

“I am proud of making a decision to not just give fancy speeches, or be in a legislative body and give speeches on a floor, but actually do the work of being in the position to use the power that I had to reform a system that is badly in need of reform,” she said.

Gabbard fired back that when Harris was “in a position to make a difference and an impact in these people’s lives, you did not.”

Gabbard added: “And worse yet, in the case of those who were on death row, innocent people, you actually blocked evidence from being revealed that would have freed them until you were forced to do so.”

Harris has already come under scrutiny for a 2010 scandal that led a judge to throw out more than 1,000 drug-related cases because of her office’s failure to disclose evidence to defendants.

 

[BGIF]

From CNBC.....

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii took on Harris’ record as a prosecutor, a subject that has fueled critiques from progressives.

“There are too many examples to cite, but she put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when asked if she ever smoked marijuana,” Gabbard said. “She kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California, and she fought to keep the tax bail system in place that impacts poor people in the worst kind of way.”

But Harris said that as attorney general of California, she worked to reform the system.

“I am proud of making a decision to not just give fancy speeches, or be in a legislative body and give speeches on a floor, but actually do the work of being in the position to use the power that I had to reform a system that is badly in need of reform,” she said.

Gabbard fired back that when Harris was “in a position to make a difference and an impact in these people’s lives, you did not.”

Gabbard added: “And worse yet, in the case of those who were on death row, innocent people, you actually blocked evidence from being revealed that would have freed them until you were forced to do so.”

Harris has already come under scrutiny for a 2010 scandal that led a judge to throw out more than 1,000 drug-related cases because of her office’s failure to disclose evidence to defendants.

I thought Gabbard had the weather gage over Harris in that exchange. Harris was dead in the water.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Can someone give an unbiased breakdown of Tulsi's foreign policy issues regarding Asaad and Syria? This isn't new news to me, but I'm curious why she's so against calling a spade a spade. Dude's a mass murderer. If you're not for America getting involved in regime-change wars, fine, but you still have to stand up strongly against ruthless, vile, dictators...no?

 

[Irish#1]

I thought Gabbard had the weather gage over Harris in that exchange. Harris was dead in the water.

I just watched the clip and you're right. Each of Harris's responses didn't contain any facts to counter the attack. Harris just generalized that she was proud of her work as the SAG.