Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Is it too soon to be talking 2020?

I believe firmly in Marxist sociocultural evolution. That society will evolve ultimately to communism. My communism isn't a stark soviet landscape but a science fiction future where everyone is rich and everything is shared.

Social democracy is the obvious next step, and we have working models in place. Over the last few years Bernie's agenda has become the agenda of the Democratic Party. It is not yet the agenda of the DNC.

This is the Boomers last gasp, the last analog generation before we went digital.
Millenials want those nice things that other countries have and they'll be taking over soon.

From what I can tell, most folks on this site are Sanders supporters. So is there any truth to this article?

"Bernie Bros warn of ‘massive exodus’ if Democrats nominate Joe Biden"

https://nypost.com/2020/03/14/berni...dus-if-democrats-nominate-joe-biden/amp/

I know in 2016 while the Democratic base voted for Hillary 89-8 over Trump with 3% voting third party. Sanders supporters did vote for Hillary, but by a 75-12 margin with 13% voting third party. If this about to happen again?

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

I think they learned their lesson after years of Trump. That science fiction bright future has to be after we solve the climate problem. It's going to be pretty bleak until that is fixed. So not like something any of us will see in our lifetimes.

But I can see an end to money. So much is handled now electronically, it would be easy to just evolve that into a social credit system. Then the values assigned to certain activities would be controlled by the government rather than by the rich.

The number of "Busters" is much lower than in 2016.

Busters are NOT "Bernie BRO's", they are "Bernie or Bust" voters.
A very very dear friend of mine was a Buster in 2016.
I am a bit apprehensive of asking her if she still has the same stance, because I am not in the mood for the venting she uncorked last time.
She's a wonderful person, but this is (or was) her peccadillo.
She hated Hillary then, she hates Hillary now. But Hillary isn't running, Joe is.

Another friend, a former associate I used to shoot film with, is already firmly in the Tulsi camp. She was Bernie first, then went to Stein in 2016. I got about ten minutes into debating the wisdom of voting Stein and gave up.
Again, a wonderful person, but that is her peccadillo.

I can say that I suspect that Friend #1 is no longer a Buster, but I am hesitant to say that with confidence just yet.

Anyway, that and a dime will get you the chance to look at a cup of coffee. I guess I'll make more inquiries...at some point.

For the record, and for Perotista's sake, I did vote for Sanders in the California primaries. Sanders won California but the math is not looking good elsewhere.
If, as it seems, that his path to the nomination is blocked, I'll vote "Democrat 2020", which probably means Biden.
I'll do it reluctantly and under protest but that's my vote.

Busters. I like that. Sounds like my grand daughter. She was going to Kennesaw State in 2016, a huge Sanders supporters. When Hillary became the nominee, she lost all interest in politics and never voted in the general. Now she's out of college, got a job, this year she hasn't expressed any interest either.

I don't know how Sanders supporters will react this year. There might be a change over in them. Sanders may have lost those college kids of 2016, replaced by college kids of 2020. Like by grand daughter in 2016, avid Sanders supporter, then nothing for 2020. Perhaps once out of college, the zeal ebbs. Loss of those young voters could explain why Sanders isn't doing nearly as good this year as compared to 2016

It could easily happen. Say what you will about Biden, he's uninspiring and has a sketchy record on pretty much everything. I can't speak for whomever "Bernie Bros" might be but as a progressive I'm looking at 2024 and whether I'd rather have a lame duck Trump or an 80 year old Biden. It's probably going to depend entirely on his VP choice.

So the choice is going to be oatmeal or arsenic. I'd rather have the oatmeal, please. I did vote for Bernie, but he just doesn't have the votes. Still rather have the oatmeal...

I agree. Hopefully, Biden chooses a fresh young face who he can groom for 2024. You probably prefer an ideologue, myself, someone more moderate. Personally I like Tammy Duckworth, Stacey Abrams, Klobuchar, perhaps Baldwin. The latter three are from swing states allowing Biden a better chance of winning them. Duckworth, a spunky Vet from Illinois. Just something about here I always liked.

I also would have liked to see Tammy Duckworth be a possible VP candidate or even a Presidential Candidate. However, she is ineligible; Senator Tammy Duckworth, despite being a Combat Veteran and a double amputee, is not a "Natural Born Us Citizen", she was born in Bangkok Thailand.

If she could run against President Donald (...) Trump*, she would be unassailable and probably unbeatable.

Tammy Duckworth

*Impeached

My oldest daughter and son were also born in Bangkok Thailand and are citizens. American father, Thai mother who has since become a citizen. A lot of people seem to think one must be born within the confines of the U.S. border. That's not the case. We've had some presidential candidate born outside the borders.

George Romney Mexico
Goldwater, Arizona Territory
McCain, Panama
Cruz, Canada
Gabbard, American Samoa

There may be others, but these come readily to mind. This controversy will probably rage until the SCOTUS actually rules on what a natural born citizen is.

As far as I know, being born overseas is no big thing as long as one parent is a U.S. Citizen. That automatically makes the child a U.S. Citizen. Now naturally born, most constitutional scholars seems to think so. Not all, but a good majority. We really won't know until the SCOTUS rules.