What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

Status
Not open for further replies.
St. Clown said:
Was the US Constitution not passed as legislation by Congress and ratified by the many states? That document established our rights as people living in this nation. No matter how you want to phrase, through some mythical being, or holding some false idea, the foundation of our rights were legislated roughly 225 years ago.
Click to expand...

That same constitution counted slaves as 3/5ths of a person, and it took a war to fix that particular error. Let's not act like Republicans and pretend it was some perfect divinely inspired document that didn't get plenty of things wrong.
 
unofan said:
That same constitution counted slaves as 3/5ths of a person, and it took a war to fix that particular error. Let's not act like Republicans and pretend it was some perfect divinely inspired document that didn't get plenty of things wrong.
Click to expand...

That’s not what I’m doing at all. My point is that our rights within the states were legislated to us. That’s it. There’s no divine inception of the document; it was the best the men assembled at the time of its writing could create with how they understood the world at that time. That’s it.
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

unofan said:
We also gave Obama a win in the caucuses to boost him to the presidency. You're welcome.

And before you mention Steve King, remember you had Ole' Crazy Eyes Bachmann
Click to expand...

And again...still voted for Trump. And Dubya in '04 after you knew he was a disaster...

<img src="https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/190/651/tumblr_lpyw2pNhaZ1r0w4bgo1_500.jpg?1319478951" />

:p
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

trixR4kids said:
He's ahead of her in every single poll lmao. And that's just Iowa, he's even further ahead in national polls.
Click to expand...

sfw? Both of them have to get past Biden and if that happens do you really think Biden fans are going to get behind Bernie?
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Ridiculously low bar. Anyone with a pulse has better odds of winning it all than the Lions. :)
Click to expand...

FYP

Who am I kidding? A rock in the field has a better chance of becoming president than the Lions have winning a Super Bowl. It would probably do a better job than the current occupant too.
 
unofan said:
A) I disagree. You don't legislate civil rights. If we did, schools in the south would still be segregated.

B)I thought fade was from Minnesota. If not, my mistake.
Click to expand...

Wrong wrong wrong.

Laws passed are always the proper measure.
Otherwise you allow judges to interpret

And they can change on a whim
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

unofan said:
We also gave Obama a win in the caucuses to boost him to the presidency. You're welcome.

And before you mention Steve King, remember you had Ole' Crazy Eyes Bachmann
Click to expand...

You also retaliated against your own Supreme Court judges who voted in favor of gay marriage by booting them out of office in the very next election.
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

SJHovey said:
You also retaliated against your own Supreme Court judges who voted in favor of gay marriage by booting them out of office in the very next election.
Click to expand...

Where as we retaliated against our legislators who tried to narrowly define marriage to heterosexual couples, and we booted them to the curb as a result. Then our newly elected legislators put into place the opposite of what we rejected the year prior.
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

St. Clown said:
Where as we retaliated against our legislators who tried to narrowly define marriage to heterosexual couples, and we booted them to the curb as a result. Then our newly elected legislators put into place the opposite of what we rejected the year prior.
Click to expand...

Isn't that kind of the whole point with legislative elections though? If you disagree with the policy decisions of your legislator but agree with those proposed by his or her opponent, you cast your vote?
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

SJHovey said:
Isn't that kind of the whole point with legislative elections though? If you disagree with the policy decisions of your legislator but agree with those proposed by his or her opponent, you cast your vote?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. And it's why I preferred MN's process for marriage equality rights rather than judges identifying it within another law.
 
St. Clown said:
Yes, it is. And it's why I preferred MN's process for marriage equality rights rather than judges identifying it within another law.
Click to expand...

Justice delayed is justice denied. I prefer whatever gets it done sooner, which is most often the courts.
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

Maher can be a blowhard here and there but he's right on this:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It "looks silly." <br>"Real Time" host Bill Maher tells <a href="https://twitter.com/ChrisCuomo?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ChrisCuomo</a> that the Democratic 2020 field has too many candidates, some of whom have no good reason for running. <a href="https://t.co/t9vgb1T3ND">https://t.co/t9vgb1T3ND</a> <a href="https://t.co/tEPB5calTM">pic.twitter.com/tEPB5calTM</a></p>— Cuomo Prime Time (@CuomoPrimeTime) <a href="https://twitter.com/CuomoPrimeTime/status/1138255292276269057?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 11, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

trixR4kids said:
Ok? So why should he drop out to help Warren rather than the other way around? It’s ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Because he's sinking in Iowa while Warren is rising? From the recent poll with prior results on the right:

Biden 24 (27)

Sanders 16 (25)

Warren 15 (9)

Buttigieg 14 (1)

Harris 7 (7)


So, Biden is more or less the same (3 points could be just statistical noise), Buttigieg has done the best (from 1 to 14), Harris also holding steady but no growth.

BUT, Sanders is sinking like a stone (from 25 down to 16!?!) while Warren has a nice increase (up to 15 from 9).

The only decent and strategic thing to do is for Bernie to quit the race and throw his support behind Warren. Obviously if he does so not every one of his people will back Warren, but combine their share and even with some leakage Lizzy is still no worse than even with Uncle Joe.
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

Right, she's going all in on Iowa and got a ton of fawning media attention recently hence her rise in one state. That's not a reason for him to drop out and we're waaaaaaay too far away from then to even consider it even if those numbers were indicative of what's going to happen in one single state. And he's still ahead of her even in that state.

So yeah, suggesting that he should drop out now is ludicrous and you've completely tipped your hand lmao. It's purely ideological and not even remotely strategic but we all know you feel that way so w/e.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

I am not advocating him dropping, but the Bernie Bros would definitely vote Warren out of the choices near the top if he did.

And while Bernie again shouldnt drop, he should see the numbers as a bit troubling. It is way early but the truth is the longer he goes without any real momentum to the top the more likely he plateaus like he did last time. Whats worse is that this isnt a Black or White nomination like last time there are many different options (including other Progressives) so he really needs to find a way to break away from the pack. He and Warren are going to be in a death battle for endorsements from the Far Left while Biden is praying Mayor Pete doesnt sink him with the Middle (while destroying him with the youth) which is what I kinda feel might happen. I thought Mayor Pete would be dead by now but he is really crushing it. If he doesnt win the nomination whoever he endorses is going to have a major leg up.

That is the fun of this stuff so far out it is like 15 different chess games all playing at once. No one is safe and no one is dead but the wrong/right soundbyte or or video on the right/wrong day in the right/wrong state could flip the script on 5-6 candidates without anyone really knowing it until it is too late. Meanwhile 10 or so candidates are running with no real discernible chance to win but who might honestly control the nomination more than any of the "winners" do as we get closer to the actual election season.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

Dumb question here- are we sure Bernie bros would vote her out? Isn’t she the closest to Bernie?

Oh wait, a Facebook friend is a Bernie bro and you’re right, it’s bernie or a kamikaze death.
 
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One

Biden is coming up with these quotes weekly, and I’m not sure who he’s trying to play to. The republicans have been playing this game literally since the night Obama was inaugurated and that was a full 7 years before Trump ever gave a speech. There are some conservatives out there fed up with Trump, but I guarantee they’re far more likely to vote libertarian or sit out than vote blue.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Biden at a fundraiser tonight, on his desire to work with the Republican Party post Trump. <br><br>“With Trump gone you’re going to begin to see things change. Because these folks know better. They know this isn’t what they’re supposed to be doing."</p>— Sam Stein (@samstein) <a href="https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1138246601309376512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 11, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top