Ready The Clown Car: The First Batch of Democrats Are Ready To Announce Their 2020 Bids

Sweet Lou 4 2 · Dec 27, 2019

MojoMan said: ↑

The latest Economist/ YouGov poll, measuring head to head matchups between Trump and the various Democrats who are running for president.

Trump leads Biden by 6

Trump leads Sanders by 26

Trump leads Warren by 30

Trump leads Buttigieg by 41

Neither the Economist or YouGov are typically regarded as right leaning operations. So, there it is.
Click to expand...

Thats not what that poll does, it asks who they think will win in a head to head match-up, not who they would vote for. Washington Examiner is a complete joke you need to get more accurate info

MojoMan · Dec 27, 2019

Sweet Lou 4 2 said: ↑

Thats not what that poll does, it asks who they think will win in a head to head match-up, not who they would vote for. Washington Examiner is a complete joke you need to get more accurate info
Click to expand...

If I wanted to quote an even bigger joke, I would link the Washington Post or the New York Times.

The poll is clear about its intentions. DEMOCRATS expect these candidates to lose to Trump. That information is interesting enough to post here in this thread, even if you do not like it.

Sweet Lou 4 2 · Dec 27, 2019

MojoMan said: ↑

If I wanted to quote an even bigger joke, I would link the Washington Post or the New York Times.

The poll is clear about its intentions. DEMOCRATS expect these candidates to lose to Trump. That information is interesting enough to post here in this thread, even if you do not like it.
Click to expand...

Then why do you have to lie and say Trump is leading Democratic candidates when that's not at all what the survey says. The Washington Examiner lied blatantly. Take your garbage propaganda and go to Russia you fool

MojoMan · Dec 27, 2019

Sweet Lou 4 2 said: ↑

Then why do you have to lie and say Trump is leading Democratic candidates when that's not at all what the survey says. The Washington Examiner lied blatantly. Take your garbage propaganda and go to Russia you fool
Click to expand...

Here is what the Washington Examiner said in the article:

President Trump is starting to run away with the 2020 election.

In the second poll in two days to show his advantage, the latest YouGov/Economist "electability" survey found the president leading the top tier of Democratic challengers from 6 points to 41 points among registered voters, even amid his impeachment.

In the survey, 40% said that former Vice President Joe Biden would “probably beat Donald Trump.” But 46% said Biden would “probably lose to Donald Trump.”

So your characterization of their reporting is the lie, if there are any lies to be observed here.

Sweet Lou 4 2 · Dec 27, 2019

MojoMan said: ↑

Here is what the Washington Examiner said in the article:

President Trump is starting to run away with the 2020 election.

In the second poll in two days to show his advantage, the latest YouGov/Economist "electability" survey found the president leading the top tier of Democratic challengers from 6 points to 41 points among registered voters, even amid his impeachment.

In the survey, 40% said that former Vice President Joe Biden would “probably beat Donald Trump.” But 46% said Biden would “probably lose to Donald Trump.”

So your characterization of their reporting is the lie, if there are any lies to be observed here.
Click to expand...

Your original post and their headline clearly states that in a head to head match-up Trump is leading Biden by 6 points. That's a lie. You can try to spin it now and add context - but too late. You spew BS and that's why you are a joke.

Andre0087 · Dec 27, 2019

Sweet Lou 4 2 said: ↑

Your original post and their headline clearly states that in a head to head match-up Trump is leading Biden by 6 points. That's a lie. You can try to spin it now and add context - but too late. You spew BS and that's why you are a joke.
Click to expand...

You know that guy is useless, he'll post within his own threads but that's really about it. Here before the incoming comical jpeg...

T_Man · Dec 27, 2019

Sweet Lou 4 2 said: ↑

Thats not what that poll does, it asks who they think will win in a head to head match-up, not who they would vote for. Washington Examiner is a complete joke you need to get more accurate info
Click to expand...

Why is it that Trump supporters (Not Republicans) will believe the pools when they are in favor of Trump, but will have a total fit when the polls are not in his favor....

T_Man

baller4life315 · Dec 27, 2019

Biden is still ahead in every single swing state. Bernie is still ahead too, and then it’s a mixed bag with flash-in-a-pan candidates like Warren and Pete.

Point being: I can’t speak for every Democrat, but I don’t think there’s any belief Trump is way ahead...by any stretch of the imagination. We’re still very well positioned to beat this guy. We just need a candidate that can withstand the scrutiny (from both sides), inevitable cheating (Russia, voter suppression) and structural failures (Electoral College).

MojoMan · Dec 27, 2019

Sweet Lou 4 2 said: ↑

Your original post and their headline clearly states that in a head to head match-up Trump is leading Biden by 6 points. That's a lie. You can try to spin it now and add context - but too late. You spew BS and that's why you are a joke.
Click to expand...

They are head to head matchups, as anyone can see. What they are polling is electibility and who the people polled expect will win. There is nothing in my post that is contrary to that.

You are bearing false witness against me and this is nowhere close to the first time that you have done that.

Have you no capacity for shame?

Sweet Lou 4 2 · Dec 27, 2019

MojoMan said: ↑

They are head to head matchups, as anyone can see. What they are polling is electibility and who the people polled expect will win. There is nothing in my post that is contrary to that.

You are bearing false witness against me and this is nowhere close to the first time that you have done that.

Have you no capacity for shame?
Click to expand...

You lying POS. You posted that to deceive people and than changed your story. Shame? You will sink to despicable lows to push your agenda. You obviously aren't a Christian since you are willing to be so dishonest.

MojoMan · Dec 27, 2019

Somebody is getting frustrated because the current field of Democrats are looking so weak against President Trump.

Sweet Lou 4 2 · Dec 27, 2019

MojoMan said: ↑

Somebody is getting frustrated because the current field of Democrats are looking so weak against President Trump.
Click to expand...

Lol, stick to posting cartoons kiddo. Let the honest adults debate

Space Ghost · Dec 27, 2019

baller4life315 said: ↑

Biden is still ahead in every single swing state. Bernie is still ahead too, and then it’s a mixed bag with flash-in-a-pan candidates like Warren and Pete.

Point being: I can’t speak for every Democrat, but I don’t think there’s any belief Trump is way ahead...by any stretch of the imagination. We’re still very well positioned to beat this guy. We just need a candidate that can withstand the scrutiny (from both sides), inevitable cheating (Russia, voter suppression) and structural failures (Electoral College).
Click to expand...

I can't take anything you say serious if youre calling the Electoral College a structural failure because your team didnt win.

baller4life315 · Dec 27, 2019

Space Ghost said: ↑

I can't take anything you say serious if youre calling the Electoral College a structural failure because your team didnt win.
Click to expand...

Not that you care but I wrote a paper on how stupid I thought the system was in middle school prior to the 2000 election. And that was before the system failed miserably twice in recent history.

The Electoral College is an illogical travesty, but I’m sure this topic has its own thread. I just can’t wait for the day somewhere down the line where it costs the GOP the White House. Then, all of a sudden, there’s going to be this magical consensus on how utterly stupid this process is.

Until then, I’ll just continue to [when I get really, really bored] watch YouTube videos of people attempting to defend this process. It’s the same regurgitated talking points that have been thoroughly debunked, and only remains in place because of how it benefits one side only thus making the Constitutional amendment required to rid us of it politically impossible.

.... but I digress. I’d hate to derail such a great thread with links from the lowly Washington Examiner driving the conversation. Carry on.

Corrosion · Dec 28, 2019

jiggyfly said: ↑

You are surprised because you think all democrats are far to the left.

Hopefully you realize you are and have been wrong all along.
Click to expand...

Honestly I think most Democrats arent all that far from the middle .... Same with the majority of Republicans tho there are those issues that separate the two , on a lot of issues there is little to no difference at all.

Then you have the wingnuts on both sides .... who tend to shout the loudest and draw the most attention. They are a severe minority but the squeaky wheel gets the grease and controversy gets views and clicks.

TheresTheDagger · Dec 28, 2019

baller4life315 said: ↑

Not that you care but I wrote a paper on how stupid I thought the system was in middle school prior to the 2000 election. And that was before the system failed miserably twice in recent history.

The Electoral College is an illogical travesty, but I’m sure this topic has its own thread. I just can’t wait for the day somewhere down the line where it costs the GOP the White House. Then, all of a sudden, there’s going to be this magical consensus on how utterly stupid this process is.

Until then, I’ll just continue to [when I get really, really bored] watch YouTube videos of people attempting to defend this process. It’s the same regurgitated talking points that have been thoroughly debunked, and only remains in place because of how it benefits one side only thus making the Constitutional amendment required to rid us of it politically impossible.

.... but I digress. I’d hate to derail such a great thread with links from the lowly Washington Examiner driving the conversation. Carry on.
Click to expand...

I'm interested to hear why you think the Electoral College is an "illogical travesty".

baller4life315 · Dec 28, 2019

TheresTheDagger said: ↑

I'm interested to hear why you think the Electoral College is an "illogical travesty".
Click to expand...

By its very definition a travesty is something that’s a false, absurd or distorted representation of something. I can think of no more perfect word to describe the Electoral College, given that it’s a relic of slavery that does the exact opposite of what it’s defenders say it does (I.e. gives smaller states a voice, produces clear winners, etc).

Like I alluded to earlier, I get great satisfaction out of listening to people defend the EC. You’re welcome to take a stab at it. It would be a nice break from the trash people are posting from the Washington Examiner.

MojoMan · Dec 28, 2019

baller4life315 said: ↑

It would be a nice break from the trash people are posting from the Washington Examiner.
Click to expand...

You mean like the Economist Magazine / YouGov poll?

Lol. If it showed a result that you liked, you very well might be posting that yourself.

Os Trigonum · Dec 28, 2019

baller4life315 said: ↑

I can think of no more perfect word to describe the Electoral College, given that it’s a relic of slavery
Click to expand...

another (more accurate) view:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/15/in-defense-of-the-electoral-college/

In defense of the electoral college
It's a stabilizing force for our democracy, even if you didn't like the results of last week's election.

By Allen Guelzo and James Hulme
November 15, 2016 at 8:57 a.m. EST
There is hardly anything in the Constitution harder to explain, or easier to misunderstand, than the electoral college. And when a presidential election hands the palm to a candidate who comes in second in the popular vote but first in the electoral college tally, something deep in our democratic viscera balks and asks why the electoral college shouldn’t be dumped as a useless relic of 18th century white, gentry privilege.

Actually, there have been only five occasions when a closely divided popular vote and the electoral vote have failed to point in the same direction. No matter. After last week’s results, we’re hearing a litany of complaints: the electoral college is undemocratic, the electoral college is unnecessary, the electoral college was invented to protect slavery — and the demand to push it down the memory hole.

All of which is strange because the electoral college is at the core of our system of federalism. The Founders who sat in the 1787 Constitutional Convention lavished an extraordinary amount of argument on the electoral college, and it was by no means one-sided. The great Pennsylvania jurist James Wilson believed that “if we are to establish a national Government,” the president should be chosen by a direct, national vote of the people. But wise old Roger Sherman of Connecticut replied that the president ought to be elected by Congress, since he feared that direct election of presidents by the people would lead to the creation of a monarchy. “An independence of the Executive [from] the supreme Legislature, was in his opinion the very essence of tyranny if there was any such thing.” Sherman was not trying to undermine the popular will, but to keep it from being distorted by a president who mistook popular election as a mandate for dictatorship.

Quarrels like this flared all through the convention, until, at almost the last minute, James Madison “took out a Pen and Paper, and sketched out a mode of Electing the President” by a “college” of “Electors … chosen by those of the people in each State, who shall have the Qualifications requisite.”

The Founders also designed the operation of the electoral college with unusual care. The portion of Article 2, Section 1, describing the electoral college is longer and descends to more detail than any other single issue the Constitution addresses. More than the federal judiciary — more than the war powers — more than taxation and representation. It prescribes in precise detail how “Each State shall appoint … a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress”; how these electors “shall vote by Ballot” for a president and vice president; how they “shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate” the results of their balloting; how a tie vote must be resolved; what schedule the balloting should follow; and on and on.

Above all, the electoral college had nothing to do with slavery. Some historians have branded the electoral college this way because each state’s electoral votes are based on that “whole Number of Senators and Representatives” from each State, and in 1787 the number of those representatives was calculated on the basis of the infamous 3/5ths clause. But the electoral college merely reflected the numbers, not any bias about slavery (and in any case, the 3/5ths clause was not quite as proslavery a compromise as it seems, since Southern slaveholders wanted their slaves counted as 5/5ths for determining representation in Congress, and had to settle for a whittled-down fraction). As much as the abolitionists before the Civil War liked to talk about the “proslavery Constitution,” this was more of a rhetorical posture than a serious historical argument. And the simple fact remains, from the record of the Constitutional Convention’s proceedings (James Madison’s famous Notes), that the discussions of the electoral college and the method of electing a president never occur in the context of any of the convention’s two climactic debates over slavery.

If anything, it was the electoral college that made it possible to end slavery, since Abraham Lincoln earned only 39 percent of the popular vote in the election of 1860, but won a crushing victory in the electoral college. This, in large measure, was why Southern slaveholders stampeded to secession in 1860-61. They could do the numbers as well as anyone, and realized that the electoral college would only produce more anti-slavery Northern presidents.

Yet, even on those terms, it is hard for Americans to escape the uncomfortable sense that, by inserting an extra layer of “electors” between the people and the president, the electoral college is something less than democratic. But even if we are a democratic nation, that is not all we are. The Constitution also makes us a federal union, and the electoral college is pre-eminently both the symbol and a practical implementation of that federalism.

The states of the union existed before the Constitution, and in a practical sense, existed long before the revolution. Nothing guaranteed that, in 1776, the states would all act together, and nothing that guaranteed that after the Revolution they might not go their separate and quarrelsome ways, much like the German states of the 18th century or the South American republics in the 19th century. The genius of the Constitutional Convention was its ability to entice the American states into a “more perfect union.” But it was still a union of states, and we probably wouldn’t have had a constitution or a country at all unless the route we took was federalism.

The electoral college was an integral part of that federal plan. It made a place for the states as well as the people in electing the president by giving them a say at different points in a federal process and preventing big-city populations from dominating the election of a president.

Abolishing the electoral college now might satisfy an irritated yearning for direct democracy, but it would also mean dismantling federalism. After that, there would be no sense in having a Senate (which, after all, represents the interests of the states), and further along, no sense even in having states, except as administrative departments of the central government. Those who wish to abolish the electoral college ought to go the distance, and do away with the entire federal system and perhaps even retire the Constitution, since the federalism it was designed to embody would have disappeared.

None of that, ironically, is liable to produce a more democratic election system. There are plenty of democracies, like Great Britain, where no one ever votes directly for a head of the government. But more important, the electoral college actually keeps presidential elections from going undemocratically awry because it makes unlikely the possibility that third-party candidates will garner enough votes to make it onto the electoral scoreboard.

Without the electoral college, there would be no effective brake on the number of “viable” presidential candidates. Abolish it, and it would not be difficult to imagine a scenario where, in a field of a dozen micro-candidates, the “winner” only needs 10 percent of the vote, and represents less than 5 percent of the electorate. And presidents elected with smaller and smaller pluralities will only aggravate the sense that an elected president is governing without a real electoral mandate.

The electoral college has been a major, even if poorly comprehended, mechanism for stability in a democracy, something which democracies are sometimes too flighty to appreciate. It may appear inefficient. But the Founders were not interested in efficiency; they were interested in securing “the blessings of liberty.” The electoral college is, in the end, not a bad device for securing that.
Click to expand...

Astrodome · Dec 28, 2019

Sweet Lou 4 2 said: ↑

You lying POS. You posted that to deceive people and than changed your story. Shame? You will sink to despicable lows to push your agenda. You obviously aren't a Christian since you are willing to be so dishonest.
Click to expand...

Wow. It is not that serious.

Forums

Ready The Clown Car: The First Batch of Democrats Are Ready To Announce Their 2020 Bids

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Andre0087 Member

T_Man Contributing Member

baller4life315 Contributing Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Space Ghost Contributing Member

baller4life315 Contributing Member

Corrosion Member

TheresTheDagger Member

baller4life315 Contributing Member

MojoMan Member

Os Trigonum Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Astrodome Member
Supporting Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

Ready The Clown Car: The First Batch of Democrats Are Ready To Announce Their 2020 Bids

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member Supporting Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member Supporting Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member Supporting Member

Andre0087 Member

T_Man Contributing Member

baller4life315 Contributing Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member Supporting Member

MojoMan Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member Supporting Member

Space Ghost Contributing Member

baller4life315 Contributing Member

Corrosion Member

TheresTheDagger Member

baller4life315 Contributing Member

MojoMan Member

Os Trigonum Contributing Member Supporting Member

Astrodome Member Supporting Member

Share This Page

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Os Trigonum Contributing Member
Supporting Member

Astrodome Member
Supporting Member