23rd February 2020, 10:07 AM
Except that insiders from Bloomberg's campaign are saying that he in particular IS planning on buying a contested convention. That appears to be his strategy.
Now then, there is one thing. Don't be so quick to scream "sexism" when a candidate isn't doing so well. There may be substantial real reasons why progressives are leaning away from Warren and towards others, namely Sanders in this case. The general consensus is that she had stepped away from the progressive policies that got her that initial rush of popularity and had made me lean towards her, and towards trying to artificially group the other progressives together in favor of allying herself with a frankly terrible candidate like Klobuchar. I would STILL be excited to vote for her if in some twist she became the nominee, but there's this fear in the back of my mind that she isn't as progressive as she led on at first when she does things like this.
And as for Clinton, it's insulting to ignore every criticism we had against her back in 2016 (and oh yes, we have far more now that she's still grinding that ax on numerous interviews further tanking her reputation) and just say "sexism!". If you think we're being sexist, prove it.
Warren did amazing in that debate. Even Biden got in a few shots, but it was rather painful to see him criticize Bloomberg's sexist behavior considering his own track record. No, he's not nearly as bad as Bloomberg in that regard, but there's a reason I always thought Biden was a creep. These are facts.
As for what's "up for debate", yes, when the convention comes around either you are FOR democracy, or you aren't. No other consideration matters.
Fivethirtyeight.com now places Sanders at a 1 in 2 chance. There may not be a contested convention after all.
And after Nevada, can there be any doubt that Sanders far and away is the most supported candidate among minority groups? The polls already showed that more women support him than men. Rethink your "sexism" stance. The evidence doesn't bear it out.
Now then, there is one thing. Don't be so quick to scream "sexism" when a candidate isn't doing so well. There may be substantial real reasons why progressives are leaning away from Warren and towards others, namely Sanders in this case. The general consensus is that she had stepped away from the progressive policies that got her that initial rush of popularity and had made me lean towards her, and towards trying to artificially group the other progressives together in favor of allying herself with a frankly terrible candidate like Klobuchar. I would STILL be excited to vote for her if in some twist she became the nominee, but there's this fear in the back of my mind that she isn't as progressive as she led on at first when she does things like this.
And as for Clinton, it's insulting to ignore every criticism we had against her back in 2016 (and oh yes, we have far more now that she's still grinding that ax on numerous interviews further tanking her reputation) and just say "sexism!". If you think we're being sexist, prove it.
Warren did amazing in that debate. Even Biden got in a few shots, but it was rather painful to see him criticize Bloomberg's sexist behavior considering his own track record. No, he's not nearly as bad as Bloomberg in that regard, but there's a reason I always thought Biden was a creep. These are facts.
As for what's "up for debate", yes, when the convention comes around either you are FOR democracy, or you aren't. No other consideration matters.
Fivethirtyeight.com now places Sanders at a 1 in 2 chance. There may not be a contested convention after all.
And after Nevada, can there be any doubt that Sanders far and away is the most supported candidate among minority groups? The polls already showed that more women support him than men. Rethink your "sexism" stance. The evidence doesn't bear it out.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)