2020 Democratic Primary Thread: Focus on House & Senate races

[Warren Moon]

Moving the goalposts I see. You said he has never done anything for people of color now you say it doesn’t count because he was young. What have you done for black people? Have you been arrested protesting for the rights of your people like Bernie?

Not moving the goalpost. I figured you would care more about what he did when he had actual power. If you support him for marching in his 20's, theres thousands of other white ppl who have done the same amount of work for black people Bernies done. None of them have been elected officials, but based on what your personal qualifications are, theyd be fine candidates as well.


I've never been arrested but I exclusively give my money to Black Owned PAC's. Have you been arrested or given money to Black Pac's?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Even in the last quarter, the Dem field outraised Trump.

What the Trump campaign has done in the last couple quarters is show what the Trump campaign and RNC joint fundraising numbers are. RNC is awash in cash. And since the Trump campaign outsourced all its organizing work to the RNC in 2016, they're doing that again.

republican money comes in later. we all know this.

 

[Warren Moon]

The same reason you think Biden will. lol

I never said that, I believe liberal policies need to account for the structural racism in America black people experience. Allocating the same amount of money to North Chicago for Healthcare that you do with South Chicago isn't progressivism, because the hospital infastructure in South Chicago is decades behind and will remain behind with that philosophy.


Biden has a track record of actually presenting and passing through bills, that were solely for black peoples benefit. Bernie and Warren refused to even talk about those policies when they were in Senate.

 

[FAH1223]

republican money comes in later. we all know this.

Regular money or the dark money

October 2016

https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Ferg-Jorg-Chen-INET-Working-Paper-Industrial-Structure-and-Party-Competition-in-an-Age-of-Hunger-Games-8-Jan-2018.pdf

What happened in the final weeks of the campaign was extraordinary. Firstly, a giant wave of dark money poured into Trump’s own campaign – one that towered over anything in 2016 or even Mitt Romney’s munificently financed 2012 effort – to say nothing of any Russian Facebook experiments. The gushing torrent, along with all the other funds from identifiable donors that flowed in in the campaign’s final stages should refocus debates about that period. (See Figure 1, below.) Maybe all that happened is that money talked, not least in the famous last ad invoking Soros, Blankfein, and Yellin apparently focused on the battleground states.

Bolstering suspicions that a wave of last minute money might actually be the most basic explanation for the Clinton collapse is a fact that virtually no analysts have reflected upon: Her late October fall in the polls was not unique. Democratic chances of taking the Senate unraveled virtually in lock step.

This was no accident, and here one can trace a bright green thread. Earlier in October, when Trump’s case still appeared hopeless, Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his entourage started pitching many famous businessmen and 20 women. Hillary Clinton in the White House, ran their argument, would be awful, but losing control of the Senate would be Armageddon. McConnell, like most politicians, had a history of crying wolf, but by mid-October, polls and betting odds alike suggested that chances of the Republicans losing control of the Senate were excellent (Troyan and Schouten, 2016, Blumenthal, 2017, Isenstadt, 2016).

Nixon’s Attorney General, John Mitchell, once famously quoted an old adage that when the going gets tough, the tough get going. In 2016, the tough, or at least the super affluent, certainly got going. Our data show that yet another gigantic wave of money flowed in from alarmed business interests, including the Kochs and their allies, who were not actively supporting Trump. Officially the money was for Senate races, but our observation is that late-stage campaigning for down-ballot offices often spills over on to candidates for the party at large. It is much easier to cooperate with state and national party organizations and push the whole ticket, whatever poses individual Republican Senate candidates were striking. Statistically sorting out the joint impact of these two ocean swells is not possible given existing data, but one fact is very telling. For the first time in the entire history of the United States, the partisan outcome of Senate races coincided perfectly with the results of every state’s presidential balloting (Enten, 2016).

The dual unravelling of the Democrats is apparent in polls and Iowa market contract prices. Figure 2 graphs the Iowa Electronic Market prices for winner-take-all presidential contracts against the prices of a contract on the combination of a Republican House and a Democratic Senate. Because almost nobody believed the Democrats could win back the House by then, variation in the Congressional contract reflects changes in perceptions of Democratic Senate prospects. The two declines very closely track each other, with the difference that Clinton, who had proportionately more money than many hapless Democratic Senate candidates, was able to scramble back.

The notion that Comey or even the Russians could be responsible for both collapses is outlandish. Something else must in large part have driven both outcomes. Parallel waves of money is the obvious explanation and our data show that both occurred precisely in the relevant time period.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Regular money or the dark money

October 2016

https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Ferg-Jorg-Chen-INET-Working-Paper-Industrial-Structure-and-Party-Competition-in-an-Age-of-Hunger-Games-8-Jan-2018.pdf

You're just arguing with yourself.

Trump and the republicans always roll in paper.

Theres a reason Hillary had to LITERALLY bail out the DNC.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

I never said that, I believe liberal policies need to account for the structural racism in America black people experience. Allocating the same amount of money to North Chicago for Healthcare that you do with South Chicago isn't progressivism, because the hospital infastructure in South Chicago is decades behind and will remain behind with that philosophy.


Biden has a track record of actually presenting and passing through bills, that were solely for black peoples benefit. Bernie and Warren refused to even talk about those policies when they were in Senate.

Oh what's the track record?

 

[Warren Moon]

Oh what's the track record?

He spearheaded anti redlining and the creation of Internal Affairs divisions for cops. He supported many other initiatives as well.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

He spearheaded anti redlining and the creation of Internal Affairs divisions for cops. He supported many other initiatives as well.

I just googled Biden anti redlining and nothing came up. Can you be more specific?
And I don't think supporting IA has anything to do with Black people specifically.
I mean both Biden and Sanders are Senators serving relatively at the same time. Are you saying Biden voted for something specific to Black people Bernie was unwilling to or nah?

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[Warren Moon]

I just googled Biden anti redlining and nothing came up. Can you be more specific?
And I don't think supporting IA has anything to do with Black people specifically.
I mean both Biden and Sanders are Senators serving relatively at the same time. Are you saying Biden voted for something specific to Black people Bernie was unwilling to or nah?

First thing he tried to pass when he was elected. Equal Credit Opportunity Act Amendments (1975 - S. 1927)


Bernie and Warren havent introduced anything in Congress for black people.

 

[mastermind]

Regular money or the dark money

October 2016

https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/Ferg-Jorg-Chen-INET-Working-Paper-Industrial-Structure-and-Party-Competition-in-an-Age-of-Hunger-Games-8-Jan-2018.pdf

What happened in the final weeks of the campaign was extraordinary. Firstly, a giant wave of dark money poured into Trump’s own campaign – one that towered over anything in 2016 or even Mitt Romney’s munificently financed 2012 effort – to say nothing of any Russian Facebook experiments. The gushing torrent, along with all the other funds from identifiable donors that flowed in in the campaign’s final stages should refocus debates about that period. (See Figure 1, below.) Maybe all that happened is that money talked, not least in the famous last ad invoking Soros, Blankfein, and Yellin apparently focused on the battleground states.

Bolstering suspicions that a wave of last minute money might actually be the most basic explanation for the Clinton collapse is a fact that virtually no analysts have reflected upon: Her late October fall in the polls was not unique. Democratic chances of taking the Senate unraveled virtually in lock step.

This was no accident, and here one can trace a bright green thread. Earlier in October, when Trump’s case still appeared hopeless, Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and his entourage started pitching many famous businessmen and 20 women. Hillary Clinton in the White House, ran their argument, would be awful, but losing control of the Senate would be Armageddon. McConnell, like most politicians, had a history of crying wolf, but by mid-October, polls and betting odds alike suggested that chances of the Republicans losing control of the Senate were excellent (Troyan and Schouten, 2016, Blumenthal, 2017, Isenstadt, 2016).

Nixon’s Attorney General, John Mitchell, once famously quoted an old adage that when the going gets tough, the tough get going. In 2016, the tough, or at least the super affluent, certainly got going. Our data show that yet another gigantic wave of money flowed in from alarmed business interests, including the Kochs and their allies, who were not actively supporting Trump. Officially the money was for Senate races, but our observation is that late-stage campaigning for down-ballot offices often spills over on to candidates for the party at large. It is much easier to cooperate with state and national party organizations and push the whole ticket, whatever poses individual Republican Senate candidates were striking. Statistically sorting out the joint impact of these two ocean swells is not possible given existing data, but one fact is very telling. For the first time in the entire history of the United States, the partisan outcome of Senate races coincided perfectly with the results of every state’s presidential balloting (Enten, 2016).

The dual unravelling of the Democrats is apparent in polls and Iowa market contract prices. Figure 2 graphs the Iowa Electronic Market prices for winner-take-all presidential contracts against the prices of a contract on the combination of a Republican House and a Democratic Senate. Because almost nobody believed the Democrats could win back the House by then, variation in the Congressional contract reflects changes in perceptions of Democratic Senate prospects. The two declines very closely track each other, with the difference that Clinton, who had proportionately more money than many hapless Democratic Senate candidates, was able to scramble back.

The notion that Comey or even the Russians could be responsible for both collapses is outlandish. Something else must in large part have driven both outcomes. Parallel waves of money is the obvious explanation and our data show that both occurred precisely in the relevant time period.

It’s going to happen again this year. That’s what the GOP are ultimately fighting against with regards to protecting elections.

 

[FAH1223]

It’s going to happen again this year. That’s what the GOP are ultimately fighting against with regards to protecting elections.

Those Senate races are so crucial too with the GOP defending seats this cycle. If they lose 3 and the WH, the Senate is Dem run.

Don't know how the Dems can combat that influx that will come in October 2020

 

[AnonymityX1000]

First thing he tried to pass when he was elected. Equal Credit Opportunity Act Amendments (1975 - S. 1927)


Bernie and Warren havent introduced anything in Congress for black people.

'A bill to amend title VII of the Consumer Credit Protection Act to include discrimination on the basis of age, race, color, religion, national origin, political affiliation, receipt of public assistance benefits, and exercise of rights under this Act or other provisions of law.'

Uh this isn't specific to Black people. It covers every 'ism' there is.

 

[Warren Moon]

'A bill to amend title VII of the Consumer Credit Protection Act to include discrimination on the basis of age, race, color, religion, national origin, political affiliation, receipt of public assistance benefits, and exercise of rights under this Act or other provisions of law.'

Uh this isn't specific to Black people. It covers every 'ism' there is.

It was solely introduced to stop redlining. That was the issue at the time.

If your going to do it, might as well include everyone.

But don't get it twisted, this was solely for black peoples benefit. It also helped us get business and personal loans. We used to pay a shyt ton more to finance our car purchases too.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

It was solely introduced to stop redlining. That was the issue at the time.

If your going to do it, might as well include everyone.

But don't get it twisted, this was solely for black peoples benefit. It also helped us get business and personal loans. We used to pay a shyt ton more to finance our car purchases too.

Oh so it is like Bernie's legal marijuana legislation. Got it.