• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

Interesting new poll from the NYT today. Gets at what we have discussed on here before. I think there is still clearly a disconnect between what voters think M4A means, and what the policy actually states. When asked who they trust most on healthcare, Democratic voters pick Bernie. But when asked what type of health care policy they prefer, they greatly prefer a public option to M4A.

EMKMqg6W4AQxaKD


https://www.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/nyt-december-2019-cci/
 
Whose fault will it be if Bernie or Warren is the nominee and they lose?

Their policies are problematic to millions and give Trump an easy attack path.

Bernie will be attacked unmercifully as a Socialist/Communist. Whether it's true or not or if it's fair or not, you know this is what will happen.

Warren's first play of ending private insurance will be used to scare tens of millions whether it's justified or not. Millions who will lose their insurance if Trump is re-elected will believe Warren's plan is much worse for them.

As bad as the Atwater/Ailes legacy has been from Willie Horton to Swiftboats to Kenya and even to private server, those are child's play to the evil crew led by Trump. Next year will bury them in mud and lies.

Warren has an very, very outside chance to win. Bernie has no chance to win.

BTW, I am still hoping for the long shot, anarchy of a brokered convention and Sherrod Brown being the compromise candidate. He's every bit as progressive as either, but doesn't have the baggage.
 
Why not Biden? Just run a very vanilla campaign, try not to say too much, select a reasonable VP from the Midwest. Pitch it is as a safe selection, hitting the reset button, harken back to when things were more normal. Talk up his experience, ability to reach across the aisle, etc., appeal to moderate voters, etc
 
Sure by all means make the same mistake Hillary made.

I'm not saying I support Warren, and she's not even my 2nd choice, though I'll enthusiastically vote for her if she is the nominee. We were asked on the last page to opine on who we thought the ultimate ticket would be. If the question is who do I support, it's Pete.

And I agree with RJ as to how easily Sanders would be swiftboated with video of him singing "This land is your land" on his "honeymoon" in the Soviet Union. I'm not the Sherrod Brown fan that RJ is, but I see Warren looking toward the midwest for a running mate. Klobuchar is too ideologically different, and a rift is developing between the Warren and Buttigieg camps. Brown is someone close enough to her ideologically and who is very experienced, acceptable to most Dems and makes geographical sense. CO Sen Bennet would also make sense. If you're Warren, you know you're not going to have an easy time winning any state south of VA. Her path is midwest.

Edited to add in response to Hoosier, that's exactly what Biden is doing, and his road has been a bit uneven and rocky thus far. And maybe he'll prevail. The problem is he likes to talk too much, and his phrasing and use of examples is often poor. And given his age, we're all wondering if he's just continuing to be gaffe prone or if he is showing his age more than Trump, Sanders and Warren are.
 
Last edited:
Why not Biden? Just run a very vanilla campaign, try not to say too much, select a reasonable VP from the Midwest. Pitch it is as a safe selection, hitting the reset button, harken back to when things were more normal. Talk up his experience, ability to reach across the aisle, etc., appeal to moderate voters, etc

Vanilla Dem campaigns don't win.

Tammy Duckworth seems like a good choice for a midwest VP. Not sure why she doesn't get more traction.
 
I would not want Brown to be VP as it would cost a Senate seat. Running for POTUS, he might have long enough coattails to win the extra seat or two to make up for it. As VP for Warren, I don't see her winning. If she proves me wrong, I doubt she'll win a big enough margin to win the Senate while losing AL and OH Senate seats.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see any way that either Bernie or Warren win. They are just too vulnerable.

If there is a brokered convention. whether it's Brown or someone else who hasn't been running, it will give the Trump cabal and machine far less time to attack and even to find weaknesses to attack.
 
I've been talking about and supporting Castro for more than five years. If you remember, he was 1/1A for me for VP in 2016. Pre-Me Too, I did like Al Franken for VP. Castro's being a bit boring could be a big plus.

Right now, barring a brokered convention, I'd say the short list for VP for anyone might be:

Castro
Adams
Kamala Harris
Booker
Mayor Pete (longest odds of the five)
 
Make no mistake about it, I will support whomever runs against Trump. If you remember, even 2016, I said we needed a new, younger generation to be running.

The only chance Bernie would have to win is if the DNC and all the progressive PACs went beyond scorched Earth against Trump which I find highly unlikely. Dems have not done that nationally in my lifetime and it has cost the nation dearly. Trump and his minions will spend well over a billion dollars tarring Bernie as a Socialist/Communist and worse. If he and the Dems don't fight that fire with nukes, he will lose big and Moscow Mitch will get more power.

Whether you are handicapping a horse race, a bball game or a political race, you have to look at past performances. The Dems have never been willing to deeply attack. Even if those attacks are telling 100% truth. They would have to do that with Bernie or Warren as the nominee.

I wish there was a 45-50 yo progressive candidate, but there isn't. The main two are too flawed to beat Trump. I wish it was otherwise, but it isn't.

P.S. If you actually paid attention to what the core of what I post about millennials, you'd see and admit that it is that you don't try hard enough and aren't willing to work with those who don't genuflect to your demands. If you can only get 80-90% of what you like you attack those who are mostly with you. Take it from us, just like we took things from our elders.

As importantly, don't be afraid to fail or get a bit bloodied (metaphorically). Make mistakes and learn from them. Don't take you ball and go home.
 
Last edited:
Make no mistake about it, I will support whomever runs against Trump. If you remember, even 2016, I said we needed a new, younger generation to be running.

The only chance Bernie would have to win is if the DNC and all the progressive PACs went beyond scorched Earth against Trump which I find highly unlikely. Dems have not done that nationally in my lifetime and it has cost the nation dearly. Trump and his minions will spend well over a billion dollars tarring Bernie as a Socialist/Communist and worse. If he and the Dems don't fight that fire with nukes, he will lose big and Moscow Mitch will get more power.

Whether you are handicapping a horse race, a bball game or a political race, you have to look at past performances. The Dems have never been willing to deeply attack. Even if those attacks are telling 100% truth. They would have to do that with Bernie or Warren as the nominee.

I wish there was a 45-50 yo progressive candidate, but there isn't. The main two are too flawed to beat Trump. I wish it was otherwise, but it isn't.

P.S. If you actually paid attention to what the core of what I post about millennials, you'd see and admit that it is that you don't try hard enough and aren't willing to work with those who don't genuflect to your demands. If you can only get 80-90% of what you like you attack those who are mostly with you. Take it from us, just like we took things from our elders.

As importantly, don't be afraid to fail or get a bit bloodied (metaphorically). Make mistakes and learn from them. Don't take you ball and go home.

ok boomer
 
As I've said over and over again, the DEMS should NOT nonimate anyone over 60 for POTUS in 2020
 
I see no way that somebody could overcome the recognition and promotion gap to win the presidency after a brokered convention from out of nowhere.
 
Out of nowhere is a nebulous term.

Could a Mayor Pete type of candidate, who is new; or from a small place make it likely? No.

Could a Senator or governor who has been around a while or is from a big state? He would have a chance.

The downside is having a machine in every state. Another downside could be the losing candidates not going all in.

The upside is not enough time for Trump's hatchet job.

The reality is if there are still 6-12 candidates after Super Tuesday, it's kind of possible no one will have enough delegates. I seriously doubt Bernie would ever free his delegates to vote for Warren. So, she would have to win outright.
 
“Don’t fight for transformative progressive policies because they’ll be attacked by fascists” is a great way to do politics.
 
The reality is if there are still 6-12 candidates after Super Tuesday, it's kind of possible no one will have enough delegates.

A gargantuan if. Six to twelve in mid-March? What is this fiction? Maybe six, but no more.
 
“Don’t fight for transformative progressive policies because they’ll be attacked by fascists” is a great way to do politics.

WRONG!!!

If you can't win, you don't fight to lose.

I've shown a rational way to get to universal coverage in a short period of time that is cost effective and won't scare tens of millions of people. Yet you and other extremists won't even discuss it.

You prove my point with almost every one of your posts. If you don't exactly what you want; how you exactly want it and immediately, you will take your ball and go home. While giving the finger to all those who won't do your bidding, even it means 50-60% of the federal judges for the prime of your life will be reactionary RWers. Even if it means a far right Supreme Court for the next 30+ years. Even if it means, turning back voting rights and civil rights for a generation or more. But that will show everyone!!!
 
A gargantuan if. Six to twelve in mid-March? What is this fiction? Maybe six, but no more.

It's a range. With billionaires like Steyer and Bloomberg, you could have five or six legitimate candidates plus them.

Let's look:

ALMOST DEFINITE (7):

Biden
Bernie
Warren
Pete
Yang
Bloomberg
Steyer

PROBABLE:

Klobuchar
Booker

That's nine which is right in the middle of 6-12.
 
Last edited:
Lots of interesting ideas here. There are no perfect tickets. Every combination will have plusses & minuses to be considered. This nation is hopelessly divided and I don't see anyone on either side who can unite the country in the current atmosphere. So the result is that this will be another close election that will come down to the same handful of states....mainly Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida & North Carolina. Ohio seems to be trending more & more Republican, and Virginia seems to be trending more & more Democratic. Democrats will think they have a shot in Arizona & Georgia and Republicans will think they have a shot in Minnesota, New Hampshire & Nevada.....but whoever can win the most EVs in those "Big 5" is most likely going to win the election.

Personally, if the goal is to defeat Trump and win the election, I think a Biden/Harris ticket would cover the most bases.
 
Back
Top