• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Biden still the favorite to win the nomination? Lets review the polling results for September

Drawdown said:
Swing voters want the WWE cage match. They want to see three rings of train wrecks, hookers, disco balls, spinning plates, and all the rest. W was a mess who could barely speak the English language; Obama was a bit of a mess in that he had zero meaningful experience; Trump is a.....well something. We live in the Age of Drama.
Click to expand...

Biden-Trump debates would be the saddest, most depressing American spectacle, just an empire in total rot and decay, with these two old geezers barely able to string together 2 coherent thoughts. It would be SAD!

I don't care how entertaining (to some) it would be. I would find it repulsive. I care about politics as a vehicle to effect the change I would like to see in the country. I don't care about watching two senile has beens defecate on each other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Winston said:
Biden-Trump debates would be the saddest, most depressing American spectacle, just an empire in total rot and decay, with these two old geezers barely able to string together 2 coherent thoughts. It would be SAD!

I don't care how entertaining (to some) it would be. I would find it repulsive. I care about politics as a vehicle to effect the change I would like to see in the country. I don't care about watching two senile has beens defecate on each other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Trump will find a way not to debate this time
 
BrotherFease said:
Believe it or not folks, we're about 4 months from the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary. Consider this the halfway point so to speak.

I am going to present to you the national polling average, and the averages for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. Keep in mind I ONLY use the polls approved by the DNC.

NATIONAL - Biden (27%), Warren (22%), Sanders (17%), Buttigieg/Harris (6%), O'Rourke/Yang (3%), Booker/Klobuchar (2%), and Gabbard (1%)

Biden won 4 of 6 major national polls. Warren however has won the last 2 national polls by 2% and 3%. Castro and Steyer came close to hitting 1%.

IOWA - Biden (25%), Warren (20%), Sanders (19%), Buttigieg (8%), Harris (6%)
NH - Warren (27%), Biden (26%), Sanders (19%), Buttigieg (9%), Harris (5%)
NV - Biden (24%), Sanders (22%), Warren (18%), Harris (5%), Buttigieg (4%)
SC - Biden (39%), Warren (16%), Sanders (12%), Harris (6%), Buttigieg (4%)

Biden continues to dominate in South Carolina. Everywhere else he's within margin of error. There were two September polls for Iowa. Biden won the first one, Warren won the second one. In NH, Warren won both of them, by 1-2%. In Nevada, there were three September polls. Sanders won the first one, Biden won the last two.

So it appears to me that Warren is gaining a lot of steam and now pretty even with Biden.

What did you think? Biden-Sanders-Warren are doing extremely well and continue to register in double digits.
Click to expand...

Biden is toast. People see a problem with son Hunter making millions in a Ukraine company while daddy is VP and working with Ukraine. There is no question of a conflict of interest.
 
BrotherFease said:
Believe it or not folks, we're about 4 months from the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire Primary. Consider this the halfway point so to speak.

I am going to present to you the national polling average, and the averages for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. Keep in mind I ONLY use the polls approved by the DNC.

NATIONAL - Biden (27%), Warren (22%), Sanders (17%), Buttigieg/Harris (6%), O'Rourke/Yang (3%), Booker/Klobuchar (2%), and Gabbard (1%)

Biden won 4 of 6 major national polls. Warren however has won the last 2 national polls by 2% and 3%. Castro and Steyer came close to hitting 1%.

IOWA - Biden (25%), Warren (20%), Sanders (19%), Buttigieg (8%), Harris (6%)
NH - Warren (27%), Biden (26%), Sanders (19%), Buttigieg (9%), Harris (5%)
NV - Biden (24%), Sanders (22%), Warren (18%), Harris (5%), Buttigieg (4%)
SC - Biden (39%), Warren (16%), Sanders (12%), Harris (6%), Buttigieg (4%)

Biden continues to dominate in South Carolina. Everywhere else he's within margin of error. There were two September polls for Iowa. Biden won the first one, Warren won the second one. In NH, Warren won both of them, by 1-2%. In Nevada, there were three September polls. Sanders won the first one, Biden won the last two.

So it appears to me that Warren is gaining a lot of steam and now pretty even with Biden.

What did you think? Biden-Sanders-Warren are doing extremely well and continue to register in double digits.
Click to expand...

I don't think Biden was ever going to win the nomination. He was first due to name recognition and being Obama's VP. He had his shots earlier but never got national traction.
 
Outlook said:
Biden is toast. People see a problem with son Hunter making millions in a Ukraine company while daddy is VP and working with Ukraine. There is no question of a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

What problem do you speak of?
 
swing_voter said:
Biden is a lawyer and a politician and he's a lot like the presidents we usually elect.

A lot of people want the status quo right now.
Click to expand...

That's exactly his appeal. One of many. He's an experienced politician and knows how the executive branch operates. I will continue to call him the favorite as long as black voters lean toward him. If Biden comes out of the first four battleground states with 2 victories, SC and NV, for example, he's in good shape.

We should also keep in mind, one candidate needs the majority of the delegates in order to win outright. If Dem voters continue to be split between Biden-Sanders-Warren, we might see a compromise candidate happening.
 
BrotherFease said:
That's exactly his appeal. One of many. He's an experienced politician and knows how the executive branch operates. I will continue to call him the favorite as long as black voters lean toward him. If Biden comes out of the first four battleground states with 2 victories, SC and NV, for example, he's in good shape.

We should also keep in mind, one candidate needs the majority of the delegates in order to win outright. If Dem voters continue to be split between Biden-Sanders-Warren, we might see a compromise candidate happening.
Click to expand...

The compromise candidate of those three is Warren, especially if Bernie and her cumulatively get the majority of the delegates.
 
Drawdown said:
LOL.

She is so like every other suburb empty nester mom who garden clubs, art leagues, sits on the womens committee at the right church, volunteers somehow for senior citizens, etc etc etc. Just by going out and getting her cream of wheat results from a DNA test just shows how proper appearance oriented she is. blah blah blah

Now politically, her free stuff for everybody is not going to sit well with a lot of working/middle class people even if they could benefit from it. Sure upper middle class people might like it, but the factory worker is going to resent feeling like he has to pay for other people's kids to go to college when he can't even afford a proper vacation, new truck, etc, whether those feelings are real or imagined.
Click to expand...

And really, you're putting the best possible face on her.

She's an utter hypocrite and fraud; the inevitable effluvia emerging from the corpse Clinton & her supporters made of their own party.

She will be the nominee, but the Democrat's zombie assault on our country and Constitution will be repelled at the ballot box.
 
Drawdown said:
Trump will find a way not to debate this time
Click to expand...

I don't think so; he won't be able to resist, and of course shouldn't.

And I disagree with the assessment some have made of his faculties.

Biden is clearly in serious decline, but Trump is sharp.
 
Outlook said:
Biden is toast. People see a problem with son Hunter making millions in a Ukraine company while daddy is VP and working with Ukraine. There is no question of a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

At best.

Biden is a complete stumbling mess and an utterly corrupt member of the ultra-elite political fraternity.

Were he the nominee, Trump would destroy him.

Warren's their best bet, but only Obama can beat Trump.
 
Biden was NEVER the favorite to win the nomination. Biden was ALWAYS nothing more than a placeholder. His role was to detract from the lunacy of the other candidates while one of them emerged and found a way to try to appear more moderate and electable.
 
BrotherFease said:
That's exactly his appeal. One of many. He's an experienced politician and knows how the executive branch operates. I will continue to call him the favorite as long as black voters lean toward him. If Biden comes out of the first four battleground states with 2 victories, SC and NV, for example, he's in good shape.

We should also keep in mind, one candidate needs the majority of the delegates in order to win outright. If Dem voters continue to be split between Biden-Sanders-Warren, we might see a compromise candidate happening.
Click to expand...

That was originally going to be Harris, but now it's Warren.

Done deal.
 
Surrealistik said:
The compromise candidate of those three is Warren, especially if Bernie and her cumulatively get the majority of the delegates.
Click to expand...

Exactly; it's already decided.
 
3leftsdoo said:
That was originally going to be Harris, but now it's Warren.

Done deal.
Click to expand...

Harris didn't really have a shot; too many vulnerabilities. I called her getting OHKOed by her record as an AG/prosecutor at the very beginning; it was really a question of who would land the deathblow.
 
I meant to swing back around to this post but forgot.

Airyaman said:
It more than just that. Trump will have partners in crime, many who are smarter than him. He will do the insulting and he'll leave it up to surrogates to nit pick every one of her left-wing proposals.

For instance, Warren is anti-fracking. She could very well lose PA if anyone is smart enough to exploit that. Shale gas off-ramp: Pa.’s fracking boom produces a glut of ethane that’s helping fuel plastics production overseas | StateImpact Pennsylvania
Click to expand...

Regardless of the details, every Democrat is pro-green energy. Every Democrat will by default be unappealing to people hostile to green energy.

Airyaman said:
But her other policies are just not that popular outside of the left, particularly when she has been very ineffective in answering questions about them. She is all in for Medicare-for-All and elimination of private insurance. That will scare alot of voters off, because she can ever explain the tax increase that will come from this. Bernie has been much better at this, while she just avoids the questions. She better figure this one out, or it's going to be a loser for her.
Click to expand...

Her answer was accurate: every family will pay less. Which is true, and to my knowledge she and Bernie share the same position. His answer has been more intelligently crafted to explain that, yes, you will pay more in taxes but less in overall payments. Warren's response has been to avoid the "I will raise your taxes!" soundbite that republicans want so badly from her. But the premise of the question is stupid. She's combating the idea that $10,000 in taxes is worse than $20,000 in premiums, copays and deductibles.
 
Cardinal said:
I meant to swing back around to this post but forgot.



Regardless of the details, every Democrat is pro-green energy. Every Democrat will by default be unappealing to people hostile to green energy.



Her answer was accurate: every family will pay less. Which is true, and to my knowledge she and Bernie share the same position. His answer has been more intelligently crafted to explain that, yes, you will pay more in taxes but less in overall payments. Warren's response has been to avoid the "I will raise your taxes!" soundbite that republicans want so badly from her. But the premise of the question is stupid. She's combating the idea that $10,000 in taxes is worse than $20,000 in premiums, copays and deductibles.
Click to expand...

I currently pay $120/month for family coverage on a company provided plan . I do have a fairly high deductible, but I chose that based on my health care spending habits over the past several years. So far this year, I have only spent the monthly amount and about $300 out of my pocket. Why would I want to give that up for $10k a year more in taxes? Because she is one who wants to eliminate all private insurance. I cannot vote for someone who is going to tell me I have to pay more.
 
Airyaman said:
I currently pay $120/month for family coverage on a company provided plan . I do have a fairly high deductible, but I chose that based on my health care spending habits over the past several years. So far this year, I have only spent the monthly amount and about $300 out of my pocket. Why would I want to give that up for $10k a year more in taxes? Because she is one who wants to eliminate all private insurance. I cannot vote for someone who is going to tell me I have to pay more.
Click to expand...

I just threw that number out there. For a person in the middle class, you would be paying about 8% in taxes, though that number is obviously on a progressive scale, a point that Warren also made clear.

But let's address that "fairly high deductible" of yours. Under MFA, there is no deductible to deter you from getting treatment. If you want treatment, you can get it. Someone in my family needs surgery, and is literally putting it off because he wants to get it next year instead of now, because if he gets it now then the deductible is all used up and he'll have to pay the deductible all over again starting in 2020. That's a terrible basis for determining whether to get treatment, but the reality of for-profit health insurance makes that a basis for how nearly everybody in the country decides to seek treatment.
 
Cardinal said:
I just threw that number out there. For a person in the middle class, you would be paying about 8% in taxes, though that number is obviously on a progressive scale, a point that Warren also made clear.

But let's address that "fairly high deductible" of yours. Under MFA, there is no deductible to deter you from getting treatment. If you want treatment, you can get it. Someone in my family needs surgery, and is literally putting it off because he wants to get it next year instead of now, because if he gets it now then the deductible is all used up and he'll have to pay the deductible all over again starting in 2020. That's a terrible basis for determining whether to get treatment, but the reality of for-profit health insurance makes that a basis for how nearly everybody in the country decides to seek treatment.
Click to expand...

I don't avoid medical treatment due to the deductible. I chose the high deductible plan because when I was on one of the best plans, I rarely ever used it. I am very healthy (lucky for me yes) and so is my son (I'm a divorced dad).

Oh, 8% will be ~$9120/yr. Still a large increase for me. It will only work if my company decides to up my pay significantly since they won't have to contribute to the insurance.

If Warren keeps up with her plan to eliminate private insurance, I cannot vote for her. I bet I'm not alone.
 
Airyaman said:
I don't avoid medical treatment due to the deductible. I chose the high deductible plan because when I was on one of the best plans, I rarely ever used it. I am very healthy (lucky for me yes) and so is my son (I'm a divorced dad).

Oh, 8% will be ~$9120/yr. Still a large increase for me. It will only work if my company decides to up my pay significantly since they won't have to contribute to the insurance.

If Warren keeps up with her plan to eliminate private insurance, I cannot vote for her. I bet I'm not alone.
Click to expand...

And my reality is mine, which is that deductibles are a reason why my family member isn't seeking treatment now.

And besides, you forget that you're human. Your body is a machine that breaks down and gets worse with time, just like everybody else. And of course there are unforseen disasters. One of those two things will happen first, and when it does, you'll realize that the current system is bad for you.

You're essentially voting against your future self's best interests.
 
Cardinal said:
And my reality is mine, which is that deductibles are a reason why my family member isn't seeking treatment now.

And besides, you forget that you're human. Your body is a machine that breaks down and gets worse with time, just like everybody else. And of course there are unforseen disasters. One of those two things will happen first, and when it does, you'll realize that the current system is bad for you.

You're essentially voting against your future self's best interests.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but we all live in the moment. Right now, in this moment, I don't want to pay ~$7500-8000/yr more for health insurance. I can understand that millions of others are in a different situation, and they must vote for what they feel is best for them (almost all of us do it).

If I'm being realistic however, I realize that Medicare-for-All will not happen unless the Democrats get a large majority in the Senate. I do not see that happening. So while I don't like Warren's (and Bernie's) healthcare policy, I also understand that she won't be able to to deliver on it anytime in the near future.

This point is moot for me as a resident of AL. Trump will win here unless something strange happens.
 
Airyaman said:
Perhaps, but we all live in the moment. Right now, in this moment, I don't want to pay ~$7500-8000/yr more for health insurance. I can understand that millions of others are in a different situation, and they must vote for what they feel is best for them (almost all of us do it).

If I'm being realistic however, I realize that Medicare-for-All will not happen unless the Democrats get a large majority in the Senate. I do not see that happening. So while I don't like Warren's (and Bernie's) healthcare policy, I also understand that she won't be able to to deliver on it anytime in the near future.

This point is moot for me as a resident of AL. Trump will win here unless something strange happens.
Click to expand...

If MFA is a deal killer for you and you believe she can't get it passed, then what's the holdup?
 
Cardinal said:
If MFA is a deal killer for you and you believe she can't get it passed, then what's the holdup?
Click to expand...

I vote according to my values, at least since 2012. Prior to that, I was a straight party voter (GOP). I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012, and abstained in 2016 (Gary ate too many edibles and rotted his brain). I can do that where I live because I don't live in a swing state. I would hope I could do the same in a swing state, but I can't say I would.

If the Libertarians pick a good candidate in 2020, I will vote for that person. If somehow they nominate Justin Amash, I'll be all on board. If I do vote for a Democrat, it will be because I dislike Trump more than I care about my values. I'm currently struggling with the idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom