Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Campaign 2020 Ever see a self-fulfilling prophecy?

https://apnews.com/9a4c92caee9b60e52cba3742df3acfea

<snip>

<Also snip>

<and then the dumbass bit>


No, you dumbasses: You want to lose the house, look divided and weak, instead of looking like a strong rearguard doing an about face into a strong vanguard.

That's the problem with the dems: With the exception of Pelosi and a couple of others, they have no NERVE.

I've been partial to "flop artists' myself.


Here's a story out of the NYT today:

"Jay Jacobs, the New York State Democratic Party chairman and a superdelegate, echoing many others interviewed, said that superdelegates should choose a nominee they believed had the best chance of defeating Mr. Trump if no candidate wins a majority of delegates during the primaries. Mr. Sanders argued that he should become the nominee at the convention with a plurality of delegates, to reflect the will of voters, and that denying him the nomination would enrage his supporters and split the party for years to come.
Editors’ Picks
Up to 91% More Expensive: How Delivery Apps Eat Up Your Budget
5 Big Myths About Money and Parenting
The Truth About Alligators in the Sewers of New York

“Bernie wants to redefine the rules and just say he just needs a plurality,” Mr. Jacobs said. “I don’t think we buy that. I don’t think the mainstream of the Democratic Party buys that. If he doesn’t have a majority, it stands to reason that he may not become the nominee.”

Full article

I don't think that's accurate. It is the NYT after all. I think Sanders has been making the argument of his head to head polling against Trump compared to others and the Illiberal 'Super Delegates' that his 2016 campaign tried to get eliminated but had to settle for restricting their voting in the second round (among other rules changes you may be aware of coming out of the reconciliation meetings after 2016).

In Nevada's debate we saw the other 5 candidates admit to their not getting the majority of delegates but will stay in the race to keep Sanders from getting a majority.

For me the "process' will look like the following-

Most of the other candidates running are looking for a payday while hoping to get a Jackpot from a brokered convention. Bloomberg buying the party apparatus should mean he gets to chose who he will turn it over to if he decides not to keep it for himself. I mentioned something about the threat of sabotaging Sanders with a brokered convention months ago.

Anyway, just my 2. Careful Hamish. You don't want to become miserable.

I'm amazed at how much bootlicking there is with the Liberal class when it comes to Bloomberg, by the way.

Well, that's how superdelegates work. At least now they can't vote in the first ballot.

Funny thing is, they were originally installed back in the day as a way to keep madmen (read: George Wallace) OUT. Now they are used to determine who gets IN.

I read something, which I can't find, that said that the Dems held a meeting which, apparently, agreed that they would rather lose the far left if that's what its going to take to run somebody that the middle can vote for. I wonder if we are approaching a point wherein the Democrats actually split by sluffing off the extreme left.

I kinda seems that way to me.

That’s how the delegates work now. Different in 2016 as I recall but the result was the same.
Determining who’s allowed to run by a non democratic minority.

The opposite of democracy really.

Your observation of SD’s deciding who gets in vs. who’s kept out is the same thing isn’t it? Aren’t we seeing the same backroom corruption in a new dress with the Democratic party?

There are a lot of people who consider Bernie Sanders a madman who must be stopped. They will be somewhat assuaged if Biden wins South Carolina, but Super Tuesday will tell the tale, If Bernie wins next Tuesday there will be no brokered convention. That's my well reasoned opinion.

I'm sincerely hoping to see voters reject Bloomberg too. He needs to get out of the race and spend his hundreds of millions on down ballot Democratic candidates.

Agreed on down ballot but Sanders already rejected Bloomberg money.
He had no choice.

Sanders' problems have a lot to do with the kind of Congress he will inherit, a Congress composed mostly of scared little cowards.
Even full Dem majorities in both houses will still be set in concrete, until the moment he takes the Oath of Office, at which point way too many of them will suddenly become fleet of foot, just like in 2014 when they were "running away from Obama".

Seriously...running away from Obama...Obama "the socialist".
Zell Miller screaming about how unamerican Obama was, Joe Lieberman threatening to kill the ACA outright over the public option.

Now roll that around in your head with a Sanders presidency.
We "can't have nice things" because we can't have nice things.
It takes real GUTS to have nice things and most of Congress, even our own Dems, are gutless.

There are some days where I find myself agreeing with the radical left.

There are plenty of days where I do, too.
Except Sanders isn't really all that radical.
But it's getting to the point where I'm about ready to agree with the REALLY RADICAL Left, except I'm too old and beat up at this point.
It's not like I can run around with a mask, overturning cars and setting tires on fire.

Thing is, I'd be happy if we could just un-f*ck ourselves to the point where we just had the ordinary pols who kiss babies, steal lollipops and make sure we're decently healthy and well ejumuhcated.

Elvis used to shoot his TV sets when they had issues or when he didn't like what he was seeing. I'm beginning to sympathize with him.

Here's Dick Van Dyke hamming it up at a Bernie Sanders rally.



Why is it that more people from his generation don't understand the simple fact that Sanders is just a new FDR? Dick understands it...people used to agree that Dick had his s*** together and was at least reasonably intelligent.
Nobody ever thought Dick Van Dyke was a radical.