Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
    2020 US Presidential Race: HERE COMES BERNIE
    • huffingtonpost.com/entry/berni…_5c4ba15de4b06ba6d3bd0a29

      Bernie Sanders is about to announce his presidential run for 2020, so with that I'm also creating this thread that will serve as a hub for all discussion related to the presidential race.

      A few guidelines:
      • Discussion that is specific to Trump but not his re-election campaign should go into other threads
      • The tone for this thread will be similar to the War Room: one-line reactions to current events (e.g. posting links to unfolding developments with little commentary) are okay but in-depth discussion is also encouraged
      • As with other SD threads personal attacks of any kind aren't tolerated here and will be subject to infraction



      The post was edited 1 time, last by Viajero de la Galaxia ().

    • Also I think what infuriates me most about the Biden speech is that you constantly hear Democratic pundits claim Bernie's not a real democrat because he chooses to caucus with the democrats while keeping the independent label, but out of Biden and Bernie one of them goes out their way to campaign for democrats while the other works to destroy them - we should be questioning Biden's democratic credentials and not Bernie's.

      Post by Aquamentus ().

      This post was deleted by the author themselves: Eh, It was not a really good point. ().
    • I'm glad there are so many candidates coming out for the Democratic nomination. I don't want a coronation let the best candidate win. More candidates means more media conversation and more free media attention, like what the Republicans and Trump got last election.

      Many of the current nominees will be quick drop outs as usual once the initial polls and especially the first couple of primary states vote. The field will be whittled down and we'll have the real primary candidates. People like Delaney, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Castro, Gillibrand, they're all nothing candidates who are going nowhere and just running to raise their profile.

      The real candidates are people like Bernie, Warren, Biden, Booker and Harris. The total number is padded like the Republican field was, no serious person thought that Bobby Jindal or Jim Gilmore were real candidates, well the Democrats have their own Jindals.
    • Yeah the 2016 Democratic primary had like, Lincoln Chafee or whatever. A bunch of them will go away fast.

      It will narrow down to people favored by specific groups within the coalition that makes up the Democratic Party. 538 created a model where these are the five groups to try and sway within the Democratic Party.

      1. Party Loyalists
      2. The Left
      3. Millennials and Friends
      4. Black voters
      5. Hispanic voters (sometimes in combination with Asian voters) (the article explains why they're grouped together)
      (They're not mutually exclusive of course, people can be multiple of these at once). I don't think it's perfect as a model but I think it helps as an easy way to visualise it. The goal here is theoretically to create a majority coalition out of these.

      For example, in the 2016 Primary Hillary formed a coalition of Party Loyalists, the Black vote and the Hispanic vote, whereas Bernie Sanders took Millennials and The Left strongly (eating into Hillary's vote in some of the areas where their groups coincided, such as black voters under 30). Those aren't set in stone though as allied groups and can be mixed and matched - for example, Beto O'Rourke is a strong performer amongst Millennials while not having much cred in particular with The Left, whereas Elizabeth Warren does well with The Left while also being stronger among Party Loyalists than Bernie Sanders is.

      In 2020, we have a few who are clearly dominant in one or another of the categories. The reason Joe Biden is still polling strongly even though from checking Twitter you'd imagine his approval to be near-0 is because he's the strongest candidate with party loyalists, and does above-average with black voters.

      As far as future predictions though I would put the best odds on Kamala Harris, an all-rounder in terms of support who also has a particular bonus with black voters, who make up about 1/5th of the Democratic party and backed the winning Democratic Primary candidate in the last few Primaries (Kerry 2004, Obama 2008 and Clinton 2016.) In the end though, it's all down to how the candidates perform when the time comes - she could end up as another Jeb or Marco Rubio who started with an advantage but wasted it with unimpressive displays.

      Post by Aquamentus ().

      This post was deleted by the author themselves: I'd much rather not make the thread a ghost town again based on my post haha ().
    • Some helpful graphs on the black vote, the party loyalist vote and the young vote respectively during the 2016 primary, courtesy of the WSJ.



      As you'll remember, in 2016 there were any number of similar stories to that Kamala Harris story you shared, about Hillary and whether her and her husband's policies have been good for black people (and to try and cut this off before it becomes an unrelated argument, I agree with a lot of those points! My post is about understanding how the demographic makeup of the Democratic Party consistently shapes who wins, not what candidates did or didn't do), but indisputably she still took the black vote in the primaries with >75% of the vote.

      This isn't an anomaly to 2016 - every Primary election cycle the black vote has operated under certain distinct and recognisable patterns, just like the vote from The Left has. History has not shown any particular aversion from black voters to Democratic Primary candidates known for centrist policies or being "tough on crime" or "hard on truants" etc - in fact, their votes have been pretty closely aligned on that front with party establishment votes for a long time now.

      Even with Bernie dominating the young vote completely he still only took about half of the under-30 black voters, whereas any age bracket over about 45 was a bloodbath - the over 60's were about a 90-10 split (this graph is from an NBC article).



      The reason it's worthwhile separating out blocs in the Democratic primary is because they're working from fundamentally different criteria - they have oftentimes completely different orders of priority from each other. The black voters in Democratic primaries have consistently put a higher emphasis on topics like "electability" and "stability" than the left, and don't necessarily line up with the left on a lot of social issues either. Those kinds of articles may be influential in the primary among the people who voted for Bernie last time, but if you try to transplant your priorities onto the votes of other blocs in the Democratic Party and use that to guess how they'll vote, it's not going to work out.

      Edit: I realized after I posted this that the discussion was quickly veering into the territory of that elections and electability thread. Might be worth moving the last couple of posts over but it's up to the mods - it started on-topic and naturally transitioned over lol.