CBS new CA poll has Warren neck and neck with Biden

[Liberty Belle]

Sanders 31%, Biden 19%, Warren 18%.

It was taken before Klobucher (4%) or Buttegieg (9%) dropped out. Though both endorsed Biden, their followers may vote for others. Today I talked to several supporters of both who are shifting to Warren or Sanders. Many women want a woman, and some liberals who are gay like the idea of a gay man on the ticket, but are now switching to Sanders or Warren.

Sanders is campaigning hard with huge rallies in CA, so I would not expect his base to shrink despite some negative press recently.

Bloomberg is running a lot of last minute ads, though most people I know here don't plan to vote for him even if they like his ads.

One more wild card: The Supreme Court just agreed to hear a case that could throw out the entire Affordable Care Act. How does Biden's plan to strengthen the ACA work then? It wouldn't.

To me, other than beating Trump and saving our planet, getting my $2K a month in healthcare premiums back to something affordable is #1, so Warren or Sanders are my only choices. I am choosing Warren, in hopes if she places second in CA and strong in some other states, she could yet be viable or at least provide a compromise choice if the convention is brokered. She's a fighter who can beat Trump and also deliver the things America needs most, or at least fight for them. I don't feel confident that Bloomberg or Biden will do enough to fix our healthcare nightmare. Sanders would try, if he wins, but would likely also get his army of supporters out for Warren (more enthusiastically than for the others). We need his base too, and a Warren candidacy could be the win-win that America needs right now.

Plus 2020 is the year of women, 100 years after our right to vote. We were cheated out of the first woman president in 2016. Let's make it happen now!

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/03/02/super-tuesday-ca-primary-cbs-poll-sanders-biden-warren-unreturned-ballots/

[AGeddy]

1. That's cool. I'm ok with Warren limiting Bernie's delegate haul in CA

It helps Biden.

[in2herbs]

2. You wrote: "One more wild card: The Supreme Court just agreed to hear a case that could throw out

the entire Affordable Care Act. How does Biden's plan to strengthen the ACA work then? It wouldn't."

I've been saying this for months! IMO the SC is going to delay its ACA decision until after the convention (release about Oct.). By that time, if Biden is our nominee, he will be committed to "improving" "rebuilding" the ACA but I wouldn't put it past the RWNJs on the USSC to declare the ACA unconstitutional, leaving Biden having to come up with another health care plan that is palatable to voters in a month or less before the election. Meanwhile, rump will be touting his health care plan and reminding people that Ds no longer have a health care plan.

It will be a self-inflicted wound by Ds.

[Bettie]

3. Is it even coming out this year?

I thought (from an admittedly quick read through) that they are going to rule next June, not this year, which would allow them to utterly fuck over a Democratic president.

[in2herbs]

8. I don't believe the court calendars more than a year in advance. Perhaps in December or some other

time in 2019 you heard they'd rule in June????? If they hear argument in June they may not issue a decision until October, after the start of the next session. I have no doubt that the Roberts court intends to utterly f**k over the presidential candidate and tie his or her hands in the ability to pass another health care bill.

This is my biggest fear with Biden as he has said he is against expanding the USSC. If we don't expand the court we are just spinning our wheels trying to make change.

[Demsrule86]

4. I won't be back until after the General...but you can bet if they throw out affordable care...

M4A will never be constitutional...I would hope you might consider the people who would be affected by this...and the very infinitesimal chance of getting M4A as even AOC agrees with.

[in2herbs]

9. I don't think that the current conservative body on the USSC will ever allow any health care act

to pass. That is why passage of ANY health care plan will only come with an expansion on the USSC of liberal judges, but that is something that Biden has said he's not in favor of.

[Blue_true]

15. The fact that the Supreme Court will hear the case indicates that

at least Roberts voted with liberals to review the Lower Court's ruling, without that vote to review, the Lower Court's ruling would have stood and the ACA would have been ruled unconstitutional. Now a ruling won't come until May or June if 2021, but a fully democratic Congress can reverse what the reoublicans did, making the ruling moot.

[Bettie]

10. Why would expanding an existing (constitutional) program

make it suddenly unconstitutional?

[in2herbs]

11. If memory serves me right, in the initial decision CJR ruled the ACA was constitutional because of a

certain provision (I believe it was the penalty provision) Rump and the Rs removed the penalty provision which exposes the ACA to the claim that without the penalty provision in the ACA the ACA is unconstitutional. The lower court has already declared the ACA to be unconsitutional because of the removal of the penalty provision so Rump and the Rs are asking the USSC to agree with them. This is why I have always felt it dangerous for D candidates to promote the ACA and say they will expand on it --- because if its ruled unconstitutional all of the ACA has to be scrapped.

[Bettie]

13. I meant how is MFA unconstiutional

May have replied to the wrong post though.

[Blue_true]

16. So in 2021, as it's first order of business, a democratic congress restores the Individual Mandate

and the democratic President signs it into law. That invalidates any SC ruling against the ACA.

We need to start thinking with our heads instead of chasing stuff that is difficult to achieve AND has not undergone a single Court challenge (the ACA has survived several already and is likely to survive this one, since Roberts, who was the deciding vote on the Ibdividual Mandate voted to hear the case instead of accepting the Lower Court ruling).

[Blue_true]

14. The Court goes out of session in June.

My guess is it is lining up cases that it will hear next session, a ruling won't come until June 2021. It doesn't do Fall rulings unless it is something that simply can't wait, an ACA ruling doesn't meet that threshold because a functioning system is in place.

We need to get Trump out of office and retake the Senate while increasing our lead in the House. The best person to do that is Biden. Biden can use the fact that the SC agreed to hear the case on the Affirdable Care Act as ammunition against Trump and republicans, Biden will do that instead of shitting on "establishnent" democrats.

Lastly, you DO understand that if the SC had not decided to hear the case, the Lower Court ruling abolishing the ACA would be the final decision? So it is very good that the SC agreed to hear the case, looks like Roberts voted with the liberals to hear the case instead of allowing the ACA to be abolished a Lower Court. Roberts was the deciding vote in favor of the ACA, nothing on the Court has changed other than two conservatives have replaced two conservatives.

We need to prevent Trump from replacing one of the liberals, then hope that our President gets a shot at replacing one or two of the conservatives. To do that, we need to think strategically this year, in 2021 special elections and in the 2022 Midterns. It all starts this year and Biden gives us the best chance of getting to the 2021 and 2022 elections in good shape.

[bluescribbler]

5. Another important point, re: delegates

Every delegate she wins becomes a bargaining chip, in terms of determining the eventual nominee, and in terms of the eventual Democratic platform going forward. Go, Liz!

[SiliconValley_Dem]

6. She is taking delegates from Sanders which is fine by me

[drray23]

7. That's good. It will deny Sanders a big haul of delegates.nt.

[pattyloutwo]

12. Excellent!

Thanks for posting

[eissa]

17. She's the only candidate who can bridge

the gap. Progressives and young voters have no home in the Biden camp, and traditional moderates won’t vote for a socialist. Warren marries Bernie’s ideology with Biden’s pragmatism. She’s brilliantly smart and accomplished, and could go toe-to-toe with trump. Can’t wait to vote for her tomorrow in CA!

[comradebillyboy]

18. I'm sure there must be some sort of contractual obligations

on the group and it's members. This could be legally messy.