Mark me down in the 'Biden has already missed his window' camp...

[Marvin the Martian]

From the Voter Study Group. People favor a public option:

According to recent polls, most Americans also believe that the government has a moral duty to provide all citizens with health care. A full 70 percent approve of a public option, which would allow all Americans to buy into Medicare. This would give universal or near-universal health coverage to Americans, and amount to a massive wealth transfer from rich to poor.​

but don't necessarily want to lose their current insurance plan (my emphasis):

Indeed, political scientists have also found that most voters are highly loss-averse and deeply sensitive to perceived threats to their material standing. So while they may have only vague opinions on issues that are abstract and feel distant from their daily lives, they are also likely to react strongly when they fear that they may lose a concrete benefit to which they have long been accustomed. This makes it all the more concerning that leading Democratic contenders, including Sanders, Senator Elizabeth Warren, and (at various instances) Senator Kamala Harris, have endorsed abolishing private health insurance.​

Politically removing private plans is a problem, and I too have concerns about that. But I know the reason. If we make it where only sick people sign up for Medicare, Medicare's cost per person is going to go through the roof. In 3 years, CO will be here showing charts and figures about how government health insurance is a clear failure and that we need to scrap the system. So the concept is to get the sick and healthy into the same plan so the overall cost is properly distributed. It all is completely logical but unfortunately it cannot win an election.

Also, private plans are very expensive for employers. Our corporations are paying for healthcare and none of their international competitors are. It would make us much more competitive if that cost were not born by our corporations. But again, I cannot think of a way to make that a winning position politically even though it makes total sense.

 

[iuwclurker]

Politically removing private plans is a problem, and I too have concerns about that. But I know the reason. If we make it where only sick people sign up for Medicare, Medicare's cost per person is going to go through the roof. In 3 years, CO will be here showing charts and figures about how government health insurance is a clear failure and that we need to scrap the system. So the concept is to get the sick and healthy into the same plan so the overall cost is properly distributed. It all is completely logical but unfortunately it cannot win an election.

Also, private plans are very expensive for employers. Our corporations are paying for healthcare and none of their international competitors are. It would make us much more competitive if that cost were not born by our corporations. But again, I cannot think of a way to make that a winning position politically even though it makes total sense.

I don't think it's fair that companies get advantages over individuals. How about these ideas:

• individuals get the same tax advantages companies get
• insurance companies have to offer all individuals the same plans they offer groups

 

[Rockfish1]

isnt bidens most signifcant support in the early polls from african americans?

So was Hillary Clinton's before Obama won Iowa. It's still way early.

 

[iuwclurker]

So was Hillary Clinton's before Obama won Iowa. It's still way early.

Kamala's gaining traction in Iowa...

 

[MonroeCity]

Biden is not the only one making gaffes.
National Review has an article titled "On Ferguson, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris Told a Terrible Lie".
Good read for all of us.

 

[Sope Creek]

Biden is not the only one making gaffes.
National Review has an article titled "On Ferguson, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris Told a Terrible Lie".
Good read for all of us.

Let me know when you cite any article calling out Trump for any of the terrible lies he's been telling for the last, well, his whole life. Otherwise, it's back into the trash can for you, Oscar . . . .

 

[UncleMark]

Let me know when you cite any article calling out Trump for any of the terrible lies he's been telling for the last, well, his whole life. Otherwise, it's back into the trash can for you, Oscar . . . .

I'm just hoping that Uncle Joe goes full on ridicule on Trump when they face off in the debates.

"Covfefe"
"Mexico will pay for it."
"I'm under audit."
"I know more than the generals."
"China is paying billions in tariffs."
"I'm a stable genius."
"I have the best people."
"I like pilots that don't get captured."
"We're going to have the best health care."

...and on and on and on.

Just use those as answers to whatever it is Trump might say.

 

[MonroeCity]

Let me know when you cite any article calling out Trump for any of the terrible lies he's been telling for the last, well, his whole life. Otherwise, it's back into the trash can for you, Oscar . . . .

Trump is a lying, cheating no good SOB. That doesn't excuse what Warren and Harris said.
Before you ask, there is a good chance I do not vote for President again this time. Making it only the 2nd time since I've been eligible to vote.

 

[Rockfish1]

Ahem:

Allies to Joe Biden have been floating the idea of altering the former vice president’s schedule in an effort to reduce the gaffes he has made in recent days.

The allies, growing increasingly nervous about Biden’s verbal flubs, have said it’s an approach that’s been suggested to campaign officials on the heels of the former vice president’s stumbles.

Biden has a tendency to make the blunders late in the day, his allies say, particularly after a long swing on the road, like he had last week in Iowa. They say something needs to be done to give the candidate more down time as the campaign intensifies in the fall.

“He needs to be a strong force on the campaign trail, but he also has to pace himself,” said one ally who has talked to members of the campaign team and others in the broader Biden World about how to move forward.
​

If Biden's the nominee I'll absolutely vote for him, but he's a leaky vessel for all the hopes and dreams being invested in him. Biden has never been the super candidate many are convinced he is now, and he doesn't look like a super candidate now either. The conviction that Biden is the Democrats' most electable candidate seems unfounded to me.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Biden has a decades long history of making mostly harmless verbal blunders. Dan Quayle had the same issue.

This is nothing new

 

[zeke4ahs]

Ahem:

Allies to Joe Biden have been floating the idea of altering the former vice president’s schedule in an effort to reduce the gaffes he has made in recent days.

The allies, growing increasingly nervous about Biden’s verbal flubs, have said it’s an approach that’s been suggested to campaign officials on the heels of the former vice president’s stumbles.

Biden has a tendency to make the blunders late in the day, his allies say, particularly after a long swing on the road, like he had last week in Iowa. They say something needs to be done to give the candidate more down time as the campaign intensifies in the fall.

“He needs to be a strong force on the campaign trail, but he also has to pace himself,” said one ally who has talked to members of the campaign team and others in the broader Biden World about how to move forward.
​

If Biden's the nominee I'll absolutely vote for him, but he's a leaky vessel for all the hopes and dreams being invested in him. Biden has never been the super candidate many are convinced he is now, and he doesn't look like a super candidate now either. The conviction that Biden is the Democrats' most electable candidate seems unfounded to me.

I think all the polls are the reason for that conviction. He’s had a pretty substantial lead in every single one. I did see a new one yesterday that had good gains for Warren. I think the other thing is most people know what they get with a Biden presidency and they are afraid of any of the really new ideas put forth by Warren, Sanders, etc. Biden isn’t my choice at all. But I’m also nervous about assuming we can attract new voters with another candidate.

 

[toastedbread]

If Biden's the nominee I'll absolutely vote for him, but he's a leaky vessel for all the hopes and dreams being invested in him. Biden has never been the super candidate many are convinced he is now, and he doesn't look like a super candidate now either. The conviction that Biden is the Democrats' most electable

He's never been a super candidate, and he never will be. I don't think his verbal flubs matter, given no evidence to the contrary. Juxtaposed with Booker, he merely looks human, an average Joe. I think some voters find that appealing.

 

[toastedbread]

I think all the polls are the reason for that conviction. He’s had a pretty substantial lead in every single one. I did see a new one yesterday that had good gains for Warren. I think the other thing is most people know what they get with a Biden presidency and they are afraid of any of the really new ideas put forth by Warren, Sanders, etc. Biden isn’t my choice at all. But I’m also nervous about assuming we can attract new voters with another candidate.

Of the major candidates, Warren consistently polls the worst h2h with Trump. Her electoral history in Massachusetts inspires the exact opposite of confidence. She is the one candidate that I am genuinely fearful will lose bigly. I know the people that are Warren supporters. Intellectual elites. They are not the rank and file voter in this country. They are idealists. We need electoral wins and political power. Elections are about one thing, and one thing only. Winning and losing.

 

[IUclover]

Of the major candidates, Warren consistently polls the worst h2h with Trump. Her electoral history in Massachusetts inspires the exact opposite of confidence. She is the one candidate that I am genuinely fearful will lose bigly. I know the people that are Warren supporters. Intellectual elites. They are not the rank and file voter in this country. They are idealists. We need electoral wins and political power. Elections are about one thing, and one thing only. Winning and losing.

I disagree with your opinions and will leave it at that.

 

[Rockfish1]

I continue to think that people are over-reading the polls right now. Yes, Biden definitely leads his primary opponents, and that's meaningful:

Joe Biden is pretty clearly out in front, so I don’t quite get why prediction markets only have him in a rough tie with Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren. . . I’m still a seller of the proposition that Biden is an odds-on favorite to win the nomination — that is, I think his chances are under 50 percent. But I think he’s more likely than anyone else.
​

If someone beats Biden, it will very likely be one of the top tier challengers, like Warren, Sanders, or Harris. But:

On the flip side, early general-election polls are pretty much worthless. They are hypothetical match-ups between candidates who haven’t had a chance to make their case to the public, who haven’t had to withstand tough attacks and who still aren’t on many Americans’ radar. And these polls aren’t terribly predictive of the eventual result either. From 1944 to 2012, polls that tested the eventual Democratic and Republican nominees about a year before the election (specifically, in November and December of the previous year) missed the final margin by almost 11 percentage points, on average — though it’s worth noting that they were more accurate in 2016, missing by around 3 points.
​

If you're supporting Biden because general election polls give him a bigger margin over Trump than they give his challengers, then you should stop reading polls.

 

[82hoosier]

In my opinion, Hillary Clinton’s disastrous campaign really set back the chances of a woman being elected president in the United States. On the flipside I think it helped Joe Biden. I’m not saying it’s right. I’m just saying it is what it is

 

[iuwclurker]

for all the hopes and dreams being invested in him. Biden has never been the super candidate many are convinced he is now, and he doesn't look like a super candidate now either. The conviction that Biden is the Democrats' most electable candidate seems unfounded to me.

I don't understand where you're getting the notion that Biden is some sort of super candidate. The basic argument is that a moderate candidate gives a better chance in the general election because liberals are smart enough and motivated to vote for any nominee. That needn't be Biden, but so far no one has shown the slightest ability to take the mantle from him.

 

[iuwclurker]

If someone beats Biden, it will very likely be one of the top tier challengers, like Warren, Sanders, or Harris.

Sure people tend to overestimate the value of polls early on. You and others have repeatedly made that point.

On beating Biden for the nomination, though, the three candidates you mention are largely leeching off each other for votes. Barring a significant collapse by Biden, beating him will require one or two of those three (or a dark horse) to drop out or seriously cut into Biden's strength. Harris could gradually cut into his Black support, for instance. I don't see any of those three quitting for a long time to come.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Mayor Pete just came out against the DH. Obviously a move to go right of Biden .

 

[iuwclurker]

Mayor Pete just came out against the DH. Obviously a move to go right of Biden .

Designated hitter?

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Designated hitter?

Yes

 

[hoosboot]

I continue to think that people are over-reading the polls right now. Yes, Biden definitely leads his primary opponents, and that's meaningful:

Joe Biden is pretty clearly out in front, so I don’t quite get why prediction markets only have him in a rough tie with Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren. . . I’m still a seller of the proposition that Biden is an odds-on favorite to win the nomination — that is, I think his chances are under 50 percent. But I think he’s more likely than anyone else.
​

If someone beats Biden, it will very likely be one of the top tier challengers, like Warren, Sanders, or Harris. But:

On the flip side, early general-election polls are pretty much worthless. They are hypothetical match-ups between candidates who haven’t had a chance to make their case to the public, who haven’t had to withstand tough attacks and who still aren’t on many Americans’ radar. And these polls aren’t terribly predictive of the eventual result either. From 1944 to 2012, polls that tested the eventual Democratic and Republican nominees about a year before the election (specifically, in November and December of the previous year) missed the final margin by almost 11 percentage points, on average — though it’s worth noting that they were more accurate in 2016, missing by around 3 points.
​

If you're supporting Biden because general election polls give him a bigger margin over Trump than they give his challengers, then you should stop reading polls.

Running for President isn't a sprint, it's a marathon. There will be all sorts of little moves and nothing really matters until votes start being cast. So, I'll hang this here.

 

[Rockfish1]

I don't understand where you're getting the notion that Biden is some sort of super candidate. The basic argument is that a moderate candidate gives a better chance in the general election because liberals are smart enough and motivated to vote for any nominee. That needn't be Biden, but so far no one has shown the slightest ability to take the mantle from him.

Sure people tend to overestimate the value of polls early on. You and others have repeatedly made that point.

On beating Biden for the nomination, though, the three candidates you mention are largely leeching off each other for votes. Barring a significant collapse by Biden, beating him will require one or two of those three (or a dark horse) to drop out or seriously cut into Biden's strength. Harris could gradually cut into his Black support, for instance. I don't see any of those three quitting for a long time to come.

You're a frequent poster.

 

[iuwclurker]

You're a frequent poster.

Krogers on College Mall is selling locally grown produce now.

 

[IUclover]

Krogers on College Mall is selling locally grown produce now.

So you’re a plural Krogers person. Interesting.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

So you’re a plural Krogers person. Interesting.

isn't everybody?

they might as well change the sign.

 

[mashnut]

isn't everybody?

they might as well change the sign.

Nah, some of us can read.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Krogers on College Mall is selling locally grown produce now.

AKA Krogucci. Our working class Kroger has no such thing.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Nah, some of us can read.

you know you say it too.

just admit it.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

AKA Krogucci. Our working class Kroger has no such thing.

working class KrogerS is JayCees

they have one in Bedford. it's Krogers with a different name.

i asked why they didn't just call it Krogers.

they said because Krogers is union, and JayCees is non union.

so i guess they can't call it Krogers without going union.

 

[UncleMark]

AKA Krogucci. Our working class Kroger has no such thing.

"Krogucci" LOL. Love it.

SWMBO hits Fresh Tyme when she's looking for high quality meats and produce. Luckily, that's not too often.

 

[iuwclurker]

AKA Krogucci. Our working class Kroger has no such thing.

I'm giving my bicycles away if you're interested. Any peddler in Bton is a few pedals away.

 

[iuwclurker]

So you’re a plural Krogers person. Interesting.

I think of it as the possessive and too lazy to stick in the apostrophe, but it is true I had to check the sign recently to see which it was. Like I give a whole lot of f....

 

[iuwclurker]

AKA Krogucci. Our working class Kroger has no such thing.

Hey, don't knock it. Krogucci's is pretty damn awesome. In Indy you have to travel miles to get to a place like that. Plus if you ever need boxes, you can get them by the hundreds at 6 am.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Hey, don't knock it. Krogucci's is pretty damn awesome. In Indy you have to travel miles to get to a place like that. Plus if you ever need boxes, you can get them by the hundreds at 6 am.

Krogucci is cool, you know for all those wealthy eastsiders. I have tried to get Kroletariat to stick for the west side with no luck. For those that may have been out of Bloomington a long time, downtown is Kroghetto. That was the one I went to for years. The last time I went was just before a snowstorm. Your average 7/11 had more inventory.

 

[UncleMark]

Krogucci is cool, you know for all those wealthy eastsiders. I have tried to get Kroletariat to stick for the west side with no luck. For those that may have been out of Bloomington a long time, downtown is Kroghetto. That was the one I went to for years. The last time I went was just before a snowstorm. Your average 7/11 had more inventory.

I loath going to the westside Kroger. Don't ask me why. It's visceral. I think it's the parking and the narrow aisles. Whatever it is, I avoid it. The Kinser Kroger is a little out of my way, but for whatever reason it doesn't raise my hackles like the west store does.

I miss the westside Marsh. I knew that place like the back of my hand, and liked their store brand offerings and deli stuff. My wife does all the "proper" shopping since she does all the cooking, but I buy my own lunch stuff (Michaelina's and ramon) and all my junk food. Marsh had everything I wanted for cheap.

 

[iuwclurker]

Krogucci is cool, you know for all those wealthy eastsiders. I have tried to get Kroletariat to stick for the west side with no luck. For those that may have been out of Bloomington a long time, downtown is Kroghetto. That was the one I went to for years. The last time I went was just before a snowstorm. Your average 7/11 had more inventory.

Marvin, you're more bitter than dandelion salad picked on the square. What do you eat?

 

[zeke4ahs]

Krogers on College Mall is selling locally grown produce now.

AKA Krogucci. Our working class Kroger has no such thing.

You mean Kroghetto does not?

 

[zeke4ahs]

Krogucci is cool, you know for all those wealthy eastsiders. I have tried to get Kroletariat to stick for the west side with no luck. For those that may have been out of Bloomington a long time, downtown is Kroghetto. That was the one I went to for years. The last time I went was just before a snowstorm. Your average 7/11 had more inventory.

I loath going to the westside Kroger. Don't ask me why. It's visceral. I think it's the parking and the narrow aisles. Whatever it is, I avoid it. The Kinser Kroger is a little out of my way, but for whatever reason it doesn't raise my hackles like the west store does.

I miss the westside Marsh. I knew that place like the back of my hand, and liked their store brand offerings and deli stuff. My wife does all the "proper" shopping since she does all the cooking, but I buy my own lunch stuff (Michaelina's and ramon) and all my junk food. Marsh had everything I wanted for cheap.

Is Aldis open yet?

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I loath going to the westside Kroger. Don't ask me why. It's visceral. I think it's the parking and the narrow aisles. Whatever it is, I avoid it. The Kinser Kroger is a little out of my way, but for whatever reason it doesn't raise my hackles like the west store does.

I miss the westside Marsh. I knew that place like the back of my hand, and liked their store brand offerings and deli stuff. My wife does all the "proper" shopping since she does all the cooking, but I buy my own lunch stuff (Michaelina's and ramon) and all my junk food. Marsh had everything I wanted for cheap.

Marsh always had good meat.