Is Bernie Sanders Now The 2020 Frontrunner?

First topic message reminder :

He is according to David Pakman. Even if/when Biden announces his bid, could he just end up another Jeb Bush? (Please clap)

smelly-bandit wrote:

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

Maddog wrote:

If Mueller has nothing, and that seems to be the general consensus, Trump is going to be difficult to beat.

Don't make me pull up your predictions from 2016.

Trump has a very low approval rating and his party was thumped by the Democrats four months ago.

you should be wary of the polls ben, the polls said he wouldnt win the first time round

guess what happened, oh you dont need to guess youve been bitching about it for the last few years.

same polls saying the same thing.

how many pieces of dog shit will you eat before you realise they aint chocloate???

I'd ask the same of Republican voters who aren't rich, but that's a different topic ...

Polling had Clinton winning the popular vote and she did, so the polling was correct.

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

was this Samuel Tilden the first to do it??

No, Andrew Jackson did it about 50 years prior.

so its a legit thing this electoral college vote

it goes back all the way through americas history, other president both democrats and republicans have taken advantage of it, yes??

how is it undemocratic??

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

you should be wary of the polls ben, the polls said he wouldnt win the first time round

guess what happened, oh you dont need to guess youve been bitching about it for the last few years.

same polls saying the same thing.

how many pieces of dog shit will you eat before you realise they aint chocloate???

I'd ask the same of Republican voters who aren't rich, but that's a different topic ...

Polling had Clinton winning the popular vote and she did, so the polling was correct.

the same polling had trump winning a wooden spoon..........................

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

Maddog wrote:

If Mueller has nothing, and that seems to be the general consensus, Trump is going to be difficult to beat.

Don't make me pull up your predictions from 2016.

Trump has a very low approval rating and his party was thumped by the Democrats four months ago.

It's fairly low, but I wouldn't start counting chickens.

If Mueller has nothing and the economy stays strong, folks may vote for someone they are not real fond of.

And if the Dems nominate Sanders.............................

It will be a shit show. Sanders has never been in a dog fight in his life.

It will be interesting, and as someone who will almost certainly not vote for a candidate of either major party, I'm not biased enough or silly enough to start calling it now.

H W Bush was at 90% approval and lost a year later to "slick" lawyer from Arkansas.

smelly-bandit wrote:

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

was this Samuel Tilden the first to do it??

No, Andrew Jackson did it about 50 years prior.

so its a legit thing this electoral college vote

it goes back all the way through americas history, other president both democrats and republicans have taken advantage of it, yes??

how is it undemocratic??

It means your vote means less if you come from certain states than if you come from other ones. If that isn't undemocratic, I don't know how you define democracy.

Let me ask you something, smelly.

Let's say Trump won the popular vote by 3 million, yet lost the election.

Would you say, "fair enough, that's how the system works"?

Or what about Brexit? Brexit wins by 3 million votes but is not enacted.

Shouldn't democracy be about carrying out the will of the governed, first and foremost?

Or should it be legalese and grabbing whatever power you can, while you can, before someone closes the loophole?

Maddog wrote:If Mueller has nothing and the economy stays strong, folks may vote for someone they are not real fond of.

1. Mueller has already proven collusion. The Trump tower meeting on June, 2016, to enter into the conspiracy. The August 2nd meeting between the campaign manager and the Russian spy, at the New York Havana Bar, to hand over directions. The Wikileaks delivery of IRA-hacked DNC emails, and Russian disinformazi. It’s a classic RICO case.

2. The economy isn't that strong. GM just closed a plant in Ohio, putting some 3,700 out of work. Obama got the economy humming, but with tariffs and tearing up trade deals, Trump seems to be doing everything he can to destroy it.

3. Plus, looks like No. Korea is cranking up it's nuke testing again.

By the year 2000, the world may look a whole lot different.

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

so its a legit thing this electoral college vote

it goes back all the way through americas history, other president both democrats and republicans have taken advantage of it, yes??

how is it undemocratic??

It means your vote means less if you come from certain states than if you come from other ones. If that isn't undemocratic, I don't know how you define democracy.

Maybe that IS what democracy is.

The UK has a very similar system.

4 MILLION people voted ukip and they got ONE representative

How's that a democracy

But you don't hear me pissing my panties every five minutes do you??

smelly-bandit wrote:

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:

It means your vote means less if you come from certain states than if you come from other ones. If that isn't undemocratic, I don't know how you define democracy.

Maybe that IS what democracy is.

Don't be silly. Democracy has been defined as something else, for 2,500 years.

smelly b wrote:The UK has a very similar system.

No you don't. You have a parliamentary system.

smelly-b wrote:4 MILLION people voted ukip and they got ONE representative

How's that a democracy

But you don't hear me pissing my panties every five minutes do you??

You've got your problems, we've got ours. This isn't a comparative analysis.

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:Let me ask you something, smelly.

Let's say Trump won the popular vote by 3 million, yet lost the election.

Would you say, "fair enough, that's how the system works"?

Or what about Brexit? Brexit wins by 3 million votes but is not enacted.

Shouldn't democracy be about carrying out the will of the governed, first and foremost?

Or should it be legalese and grabbing whatever power you can, while you can, before someone closes the loophole?

Seen this, smelly?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:If Mueller has nothing and the economy stays strong, folks may vote for someone they are not real fond of.

1.  Mueller has already proven collusion.  The Trump tower meeting on June, 2016, to enter into the conspiracy.  The August 2nd meeting between the campaign manager and the Russian spy, at the New York Havana Bar, to hand over directions.  The Wikileaks delivery of IRA-hacked DNC emails, and Russian disinformazi.  It’s a classic RICO case.

2.  The economy isn't that strong.  GM just closed a plant in Ohio, putting some 3,700 out of work.  Obama got the economy humming, but with tariffs and tearing up trade deals, Trump seems to be doing everything he can to destroy it.

3.  Plus, looks like No. Korea is cranking up it's nuke testing again.

By the year 2000, the world may look a whole lot different.

If Mueller has enough to force Trump out of office. If not, Trump gets to scream about how it was a witch hunt.

The plant in Ohio made cars. They don't sell as well as they used to. The plant in Arlington, TX is expanding.

The economy is doing well by any honest measure, although I doubt your interested in honest measures of anything.

>THE Ben Reilly< wrote:Let me ask you something, smelly.

Let's say Trump won the popular vote by 3 million, yet lost the election.

Would you say, "fair enough, that's how the system works"?

Or what about Brexit? Brexit wins by 3 million votes but is not enacted.

Shouldn't democracy be about carrying out the will of the governed, first and foremost?

Or should it be legalese and grabbing whatever power you can, while you can, before someone closes the loophole?

Yes I saw it but had to bug out.

OK. Let me explain a little but about the differences between Brexit and trump.

Firstly Brexit was a referendum not an election, which means its a binary choice with the answer being clear and unambiguous, it's purely a numbers game.

Now despite this clear cut nature of a referendum politicians in the UK who promised to honour the result have done everything they can to overturn it, it pursuit of their own personal ambitions and financial interests in the EU.

So indeed we are in the exact situation you described, a clear vote for Brexit and yet it is looking increasingly unlikely the result will be respected, that represents the death of democracy in the UK.

Trumps election is nothing of the sort, your electoral system was established centuries ago and has been used through your history to elect your presidents.

The popular vote and the electoral college are both part of that system, and as we discussed winning the electoral college but losing the popular and still being elected has been done several times throughout US history by both Democrats and Republicans.

But you seem to acting as though trump has somehow created this loophole and is using it for the first time in US history to somehow steal the election.

That is simply not the case.

Democracy carrying out the will of the Government ?
I thought it was carrying out the will of the People ?