Democrats

[Mike]

It's a two person race now. It's just a matter of one team picking which 70 year old white guy to run against the other team's 70 year old white guy.

[Eliahad]

It sure feels like some back room deals got did, don't it?

[Stan]

[Mike]

[Kyle]

Okay, Mike, but you seem to be saying deals weren’t made and these decisions were independently made based on math. That’s just not true. Arms were twisted and fortunes were promised.

[Mike]

Shades of gray is what I'm saying. Buttigieg ran out of money AND had no path to winning AND knew that staying in the race would only put him in debt and hurt his chances at a national position with whoever the ultimate winner might be. So he had to drop out soon regardless. Sure, there absolutely had to be some wheeling and dealing to secure the timing and his endorsement and all that. I'm just saying that backroom dealing didn't force anyone out of the race, even if it was a deciding factor in the how and when.

Okay... now that I typed it all out, I see the point being made. Yes, they were going to drop out anyway, but yeah, I bet Biden's camp put on a ton of pressure and made a lot of promises to make sure it happened before Super Tuesday and not the day after. I get it now... you guys are right.

[Tahlvin]

And I'm sure it wasn't just Biden's campaign, but the DNC and other top D power brokers as well. I'm sure they're not thrilled about their prospects if Sanders becomes the nominee and takes over control of the party.

[poorpete]

If Biden and his allies were able to convince multiple candidates in his lane to drop out and endorse him, it shows he may still have a good legislative touch.

The center-left candidates coming together, which is not rigging or illegal or unfair, or entirely accurate (Bloomberg is still in the race and center-lefts like Harris and Gillbrand have yet to endorse). What really made Tuesday memorable was the voters, who you can either say cynically followed orders from DNC, but far more likely voted their preference based on the four candidates remaining.

Center unites
"rigging, unfair, illegal! Oh btw Warren, you have to quit and endorse Sanders."
No thanks
"Snake! Rigging, unfair, illegal!"

[akiva]

Bloomberg is out. Endorsed Biden.

[Stan]

Is Biden going to to a Clinton II? It looks like most of his wins/support are in southern states that he will then lose in general election.

[Kyle]

Originally I was going to vote for Biden. Not because I liked him or aligned with his policies, but because I thought he had the best chance to beat Trump. Then I read a great article on how this kind of "practical" decision making can distort national politics. In the case of Biden, the argument made was that he's going to get much more support than what really exists because everyone thinks the way I was thinking and because they don't think their candidate is as viable. So the "non-viable" candidate gets artificially deflated support and the "viable" candidate gets artificially inflated support. But some voting models show that if everyone voted for the candidate they wanted to win, then formerly-perceive "non-viable" candidates become viable when people realize the true level of support behind them. I liked this argument and decided to vote for the candidate that I wanted to win: Sanders.

[poorpete]

As a Gillibrand -> Warren supporter, if she quits, my desire for a cool and calm leader and a return to Obama-era relative-normalcy, I'll probably head back to the center-left and vote Biden. But I think her staying in still has some upsides to each candidate.

Benefit for Warren:
She'll may amass more delegates which will make her influence high at the convention, which will still very possibly be contested. A seat at the table for a woman in a contested convention I'd prefer and she'd fight for unity which I'm not sure the other two care much about. A very outside chance she could make a big comeback in the polls and make this a three-person race.

Benefit for Biden:
Conventional wisdom is he'd be gifted with the delegate lead by the end of the primaries. (Though again, there'll be a not-zero sum of voters like me that will lean-Biden if she leaves the race)

Benefit for Sanders:
Warren is a take-no-prisoners debater, and she could do damage to Biden (and herself) during them while Sanders could stay above the negativity. If Sanders thinks he's not going to amass the most delegates, having him and Warren amass the 2nd and 3rd most will make for high bargaining power at the convention.

That said, maybe we won't need her to stay in and force a contested convention to unite the sides if she can gain concessions now from the frontrunners.

[poorpete]

Her 1.7 million votes in the primary is the most for a woman not named Hillary in US History, and more than what Jill Stein got in 2016 general.

[Phoebe]

Some of my friends quite broken up about Warren's departure and taking it fairly personally, but I think it's simply that people are THAT scared of Trump beating Bernie, so they decided to settle on what seemed like the safer bet. I am raising up a good woman president for y'all if we don't manage to get it done in the next few decades. Not that I'm cynical or anything, ha ha.

[Phoebe]

Completely agree with this analysis of how terrible it was for Chuck Schumer to be saying such things about Supreme Court Justices:
Strangely, no one is pointing out the fact that Schumer was literally repeating the exact words used by both Kavanaugh and Trump, but that makes it no better. If you think it's wrong to say these things about a member of another party when Trump does it, or to make vague political threats that impugn the Independence and objectivity of judicial decisions when Kavanaugh says them, then it's wrong, period. Or as the kids say to me now, periodt. Why the t?
Anyway, Schumer's non-apology was embarrassing, like yeah, if I was thuggish, it's because I was bred that way. No, Chuck, just stop and apologize and get on a higher plane where we need you to be, because Democracy.

[Stan]

[Phoebe]

I think you are right. I don't think there's so much for these money-lovers to be afraid of with Bernie because it's not like the entire Democratic Congress (assuming that they achieve and maintain a majority) would cheerfully implement all of his policy ideas. It would all be watered down. My big concern about him at this point is he simply can't draw in enough new voters and inspire enough turnout to win the whole shebang. If all the young people voted at the same rates as the old people then he could win both the primary and the general. But they don't and they won't.

[Stan]

There's a decent chance that it will come down to the convention. If it does, I really hope Bernie followers don't get all butt hurt when they lose out.

[Mike]

Bernie only became the frontrunner in a divided field. Now that it's just two of them, Bernie's limitations become more apparent. But here's the thing:

If Biden is the nominee, he will be running on the most progressive platform of any candidate for president ever. That's incredible. In fact, aside from Bloomberg, whoever the nominee was, they'd be running on the most progressive platform ever. And much of that is due to Bernie. Bernie Sandera made it mainstream. He moved the Overton window to allow discussion to shift to the left. Even if he is not the nominee, he's shaped the landscape in which this next election will be fought.

[Tahlvin]

So what do you think about the questions around Biden's mental faculties being up to the task at hand?