What If? 2020

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
honorentheos
God
Posts: 3762
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am

Re: What If? 2020

Post by honorentheos »

Xenophon wrote:
Thu Jul 28, 2022 2:38 pm
Interesting question, honor.

I'd start by saying that I'm pretty doubtful that had any of the other candidates been nominated that the result would have been the same. Far too close a race in some areas to suspect that a whole different candidate gets Dems there. I also think that putting an early end to in-fighting and focusing on non-primary messaging was critical to Biden's win. That said, that wasn't the question you asked.

I think in your scenario we have to imagine Sanders gets the nod as opposed to anyone else, he had the highest delegate count by far and I'm hard pressed to imagine another in the moderate wing of the party responding too terribly differently. To the domestic agenda, I doubt Sanders would have gotten much more than Biden has. Perhaps he is just the greatest statesman of all time but I'm not optimistic he'd be better at consolidating the party, especially given his "outsider" feel (fair or not). You've already highlighted the difficulties presented by how narrow the margin of victory was and that doesn't go away if you change the leader of the party.

You've presented some different strategies you'd have liked the Biden admin to take, namily breaking these huge bills into smaller, more easily managed, chunks on popular topics (infrastructure, child care, health care, family leave, etc.). I see the wisdom in that approach and its possible that would have been easier to get through, folks are way less likely to block a bill dedicated exclusively to a popular topic. I'm not sure if any other President would have tried that though, especially since that doesn't seem to be the direction Congress is moving.

The only area I suspect Sanders might have had notable impact would be on inflation. Not that the current result would have been different, just that I can easily see his admin being less tone deaf on the topic.
Hey Xeno,

I wanted to raise the question as a way of examining how much we really think the person occupying the White House matters, where it matters, and to what degree. For sure, had the other Dems not rallied around Biden it's very likely Sanders would have won the nomination with a completely unpredictable general election result. I genuinely don't think the Senate would have flipped because at least Georgia and probably Arizona would have gone red in response to the fear over extremism coming from the White House. Biden sold predictability, stability, centrism and rationality. Sanders would have been an entirely different direction that might have fired up some, but it might have meant more split ticket voters who didn't want Trump but preferred to see a check against extreme leftward shifts so they would have voted for a Republican in the Senate or House. Who knows.

Anyway, I don't see Sanders outperforming Biden on most metrics. I don't think Joe Manchin would be closer to Democrats were Sanders in the White House. I don't see Sanders handling Russia or China better than the Biden admin has. He has no where to go but up on the Afghanistan withdrawal so there's that. Would Sanders have solved immigration and persuaded Congress to act? I don't think so. Would he have honestly handled inflation better? I'm not sure how. He would have entered into the same mid-COVID situation where there was a need to inject money into the economy. Would it have been less liquid and instead been better tied to services that pulled wages up faster and more broadly to cool off price inflation? Don't know.

It seems we are witnessing a harsh reality about the White House as a job that has influence on what conditions the next person gets to deal with.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 7062
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: What If? 2020

Post by canpakes »

Binger wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:33 am
Hindu Cult?

To your question, from 2015:

https://www.civilbeat.org/2015/03/krish ... i-gabbard/
User avatar
Dr. Shades
Founder and Visionary
Posts: 1874
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:48 pm
Contact:

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Dr. Shades »

honorentheos wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:19 am
Brnnt.
“Brnnt” = ?
"It’s ironic that the Church that people claim to be true, puts so much effort into hiding truths."
--I Have Questions, 01-25-2024
Hawkeye
2nd Counselor
Posts: 401
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2021 1:37 pm

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Hawkeye »

Biden isn't with us and hasn't been with us for a long time. But Biden's poor messaging and frailty isn't the reason for the recession, gas prices doubling, inflation, and losing in foreign policy that's been going on. These failures are the result of Democrat policy.
The best part about this is waiting four years to see how all the crazy apocalyptic predictions made by the fear mongering idiots in Right Wing media turned out to be painfully wrong...Gasoline would hit $10/gallon. Hyperinflation would ensue.
Veritas
Vēritās
God
Posts: 1555
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2022 2:51 am

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Vēritās »

Hawkeye wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 12:25 pm
Biden isn't with us and hasn't been with us for a long time. But Biden's poor messaging and frailty isn't the reason for the recession, gas prices doubling, inflation, and losing in foreign policy that's been going on. These failures are the result of Democrat policy.
Biden has already done more than Trump in the 18 months he's been in office. You can keep repeating the idiotic assertions about "Democrat policy but you haven't even begun to outline what policies you're referring to nor have you demonstrated any correlation = causation. All you're doing is passing the buck to Biden for Trump's epic failures, the same way you passed Obama's epic achievements onto Trump.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal ...(there are) mentally challenged people with special needs like myself- Ajax18
User avatar
Some Schmo
God
Posts: 2469
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Some Schmo »

Vēritās wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 12:36 pm
You can keep repeating the idiotic assertions...
Oh, he will. He's got nothing else.
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.

The god idea is popular with desperate people.
User avatar
Xenophon
Savior (resurrected state)
Posts: 998
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Xenophon »

I think we are very much on the same page Honor but I wanted to dig a bit deeper on this:
honorentheos wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:41 am
I wanted to raise the question as a way of examining how much we really think the person occupying the White House matters, where it matters, and to what degree.
I think who is in the chair matters quite a bit in many ways but that influence doesn't exist in a vacuum. Every administration is limited by the work and decisions of previous admins, even those of the same party. I'm hard pressed to imagine Sanders existing in the same place as Biden and having a much different result. But I can easily see Sanders (or Biden) having quite a different scenario to work with if say Cruz or Rubio won the 2016 nomination and general election.

The office only has so many tools in that tool box and what work can be done is further limited by how much clean-up is needed. Couple that with the ever growing partisan nature of the system, razor thin victory margins, and a system purposefully designed to resist big changes and I'm not sure it is fair to expect many miracles from elected officials. Is that good or right? Hard to say, but it is probably more rigid and inflexible than I'd like. But I also think that is exactly by design, rather than a bug in the system.
honorentheos wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:41 am
Would he have honestly handled inflation better?
My only note here is that I can see him being better at preparing Americans for the inflation that was inevitably coming. I doubt the numbers would look much different but I can definitely see a Sanders admin being more open about what was coming and not attempting to downplay the impacts as much as we've seen (fully granting that some of that is outside of Biden's team and more of a media thing). He wasn't/isn't my choice but I have to give him credit for at least generally been very forthright and not sugar coating the experience of struggling Americans.
He/Him

“If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation.”
― Xenophon
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Binger »

Xenophon wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:26 pm
I think we are very much on the same page Honor but I wanted to dig a bit deeper on this:
honorentheos wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:41 am
I wanted to raise the question as a way of examining how much we really think the person occupying the White House matters, where it matters, and to what degree.
I think who is in the chair matters quite a bit in many ways but that influence doesn't exist in a vacuum. Every administration is limited by the work and decisions of previous admins, even those of the same party. I'm hard pressed to imagine Sanders existing in the same place as Biden and having a much different result. But I can easily see Sanders (or Biden) having quite a different scenario to work with if say Cruz or Rubio won the 2016 nomination and general election.

The office only has so many tools in that tool box and what work can be done is further limited by how much clean-up is needed. Couple that with the ever growing partisan nature of the system, razor thin victory margins, and a system purposefully designed to resist big changes and I'm not sure it is fair to expect many miracles from elected officials. Is that good or right? Hard to say, but it is probably more rigid and inflexible than I'd like. But I also think that is exactly by design, rather than a bug in the system.
honorentheos wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 4:41 am
Would he have honestly handled inflation better?
My only note here is that I can see him being better at preparing Americans for the inflation that was inevitably coming. I doubt the numbers would look much different but I can definitely see a Sanders admin being more open about what was coming and not attempting to downplay the impacts as much as we've seen (fully granting that some of that is outside of Biden's team and more of a media thing). He wasn't/isn't my choice but I have to give him credit for at least generally been very forthright and not sugar coating the experience of struggling Americans.
There is a massive difference in leadership between Biden and Sanders. There is a massive difference in leadership between Biden and Trump. Sanders and Trump have more in common than posters on this board wish to admit. Sanders is a liberal populist and would have peeled off many voters whose primary issue is disparity, wages, American jobs, unions and equity.

Would his socialist agenda appeal to everyone? Hell no. But he can damn sure fill a stadium with supporters and he can rally the masses. He always had more real support than the DNC guard. He was not done in by the voters in his campaigns. He was done in by superdelegate shenanigans in 2016 and a rigged primary and backroom deals (South Carolina) in 2020.

In the summer of 2016 Clinton was leading Trump by over 10 points in the polls. She lost. She lost because no matter how much she motivated a +1 marginal vote in key states, it came at a price of -1 or more among labor and democratic blue collar workers and +1 or more for Trump among labor and blue collar workers. Calling Trump's base racist or degenerate may have gained her a gross +1 among marginal voters in some places, but it cost her votes and netted Trump more than her net. Sanders, as a leader, can speak to the same bass that supported Trump and avoid a net negative by motivating blue collar workers and families.

I do not support all of Bernie's liberal BS. But, let's be honest, McConnell and McCarthy are bigger spenders and dumber than the squad when it comes to leadership. crapping all over Bernie was political and helped Clinton and Biden get the nomination, but it came at a huge price. Getting labor, families, workers and anyone but politically identified groups back into the democrat camp is going to be tough. So tough, that it is being abandoned for more Trump Derangement Syndrome instead. See above.
User avatar
Xenophon
Savior (resurrected state)
Posts: 998
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Xenophon »

Binger wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:51 pm
There is a massive difference in leadership between Biden and Sanders. There is a massive difference in leadership between Biden and Trump. Sanders and Trump have more in common than posters on this board wish to admit. Sanders is a liberal populist and would have peeled off many voters whose primary issue is disparity, wages, American jobs, unions and equity.
You'll find no disagreement from me here although I'd probably quibble over the sincerity of Trump vs Sanders and who has the actual chops/legacy to back being a populist for real and which one is a pure opportunist. I just think that regardless of some ineffable leadership qualities the office of president only has so much it is capable of doing. Sanders would have even less support from his party than Biden does and would likely face even more resistance from the Right. That isn't exactly a winning combination for enacting positive policies. The bully pulpit is nice but it only carries you so far. And my time on Earth has not made me more confident in the American electorate to vote out politicians that stand in the way of otherwise tremendously popular or (in my opinion at least) positive policies and practices.
Binger wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:51 pm
Would his socialist agenda appeal to everyone? Hell no. But he can damn sure fill a stadium with supporters and he can rally the masses. He always had more real support than the DNC guard. He was not done in by the voters in his campaigns. He was done in by superdelegate shenanigans in 2016 and a rigged primary and backroom deals (South Carolina) in 2020.
Sanders couldn't even win the primary, twice, let alone a general election. You might argue that the institutional pushback he faced was too great but I disagree. He wasn't even close in the popular vote or delegates (even throwing superdelegates out) and major national party conventions favoring a candidate is nothing new and hasn't stopped lots of other candidates from breaking through anyway. I'd also argue that the complaints from folks that like that Sanders exists partially outside the system but are mad the system doesn't clear the way for him are silly, it is the expected outcome.

Come the general election the pushback from the GOP would have been much heavier and harder as well and I don't see a world in which Sanders manages to steal away enough of the middle or right after the "bUt SoCiAlIsM" chants started. Maybe I'm off base here but history isn't very favorable to the idea that all Sanders needed was for the DNC to move out of the way.

Not saying any of that is right or fair, just that the seeds that stop Sanders from being more successful than I think he likely should be were being sown long before 2016 and there is still a long road ahead for him, or more likely one of his protegees, to achieve true national success.

I also don't want to rehash it so I'll let you have the last word but I fundamentally disagree with your assessment of why the 2016 general election shifted the way it did. I think actual voting patterns and polling data paint a very different picture but we'll just have to agree to disagree on what cost Clinton her seat.
He/Him

“If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation.”
― Xenophon
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: What If? 2020

Post by Binger »

Xenophon wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 3:28 pm
Binger wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:51 pm
There is a massive difference in leadership between Biden and Sanders. There is a massive difference in leadership between Biden and Trump. Sanders and Trump have more in common than posters on this board wish to admit. Sanders is a liberal populist and would have peeled off many voters whose primary issue is disparity, wages, American jobs, unions and equity.
You'll find no disagreement from me here although I'd probably quibble over the sincerity of Trump vs Sanders and who has the actual chops/legacy to back being a populist for real and which one is a pure opportunist. I just think that regardless of some ineffable leadership qualities the office of president only has so much it is capable of doing. Sanders would have even less support from his party than Biden does and would likely face even more resistance from the Right. That isn't exactly a winning combination for enacting positive policies. The bully pulpit is nice but it only carries you so far. And my time on Earth has not made me more confident in the American electorate to vote out politicians that stand in the way of otherwise tremendously popular or (in my opinion at least) positive policies and practices.
Binger wrote:
Fri Jul 29, 2022 1:51 pm
Would his socialist agenda appeal to everyone? Hell no. But he can damn sure fill a stadium with supporters and he can rally the masses. He always had more real support than the DNC guard. He was not done in by the voters in his campaigns. He was done in by superdelegate shenanigans in 2016 and a rigged primary and backroom deals (South Carolina) in 2020.
Sanders couldn't even win the primary, twice, let alone a general election. You might argue that the institutional pushback he faced was too great but I disagree. He wasn't even close in the popular vote or delegates (even throwing superdelegates out) and major national party conventions favoring a candidate is nothing new and hasn't stopped lots of other candidates from breaking through anyway. I'd also argue that the complaints from folks that like that Sanders exists partially outside the system but are mad the system doesn't clear the way for him are silly, it is the expected outcome.

Come the general election the pushback from the GOP would have been much heavier and harder as well and I don't see a world in which Sanders manages to steal away enough of the middle or right after the "bUt SoCiAlIsM" chants started. Maybe I'm off base here but history isn't very favorable to the idea that all Sanders needed was for the DNC to move out of the way.

Not saying any of that is right or fair, just that the seeds that stop Sanders from being more successful than I think he likely should be were being sown long before 2016 and there is still a long road ahead for him, or more likely one of his protegees, to achieve true national success.

I also don't want to rehash it so I'll let you have the last word but I fundamentally disagree with your assessment of why the 2016 general election shifted the way it did. I think actual voting patterns and polling data paint a very different picture but we'll just have to agree to disagree on what cost Clinton her seat.
Chops, Likes, Upvotes, Thumbs-up and Kudos for this post, Xeno. (more to come in separate responses so the mods can reject it in parts).
Post Reply