• 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

This is what I'm not getting. It's kinda hard for anyone without an R to win statewide in Texas, right?

It’s kinda hard to win the presidency, too. Perhaps his charisma could carry him in a general, but his record certainly won’t. He may move left as he enters the national political scene, but whether voters will trust him remains to be seen.

What did you think about mdmh’s post, btw? Or The Guardian article that he referenced?

After 2000, 2004, and 2016, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for Democrats to have high expectations for a presidential candidate.

Every Dem on this board is intelligent and votes for candidates when it counts. The pushback on here towards critical discourse is concerning to say the least.
 
It’s kinda hard to win the presidency, too. Perhaps his charisma could carry him in a general, but his record certainly won’t. He may move left as he enters the national political scene, but whether voters will trust him remains to be seen.

What did you think about mdmh’s post, btw? Or The Guardian article that he referenced?

After 2000, 2004, and 2016, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for Democrats to have high expectations for a presidential candidate.

Every Dem on this board is intelligent and votes for candidates when it counts. The pushback on here towards critical discourse is concerning to say the least.

Yet you fawn over AOC who won..........an extremely progressive congressional district in NY.
 
Yet you fawn over AOC who won..........an extremely progressive congressional district in NY.

What’s your point? She represents my political ideology about as closely as any politician in my lifetime. Of course I like her a lot.
 
What’s your point? She represents my political ideology about as closely as any politician in my lifetime. Of course I like her a lot.

My point is that you act like the only people who are electable nationwide are progressives when there is little evidence that this is the case. Of course you should like people who match your ideology. Your comment about Beto not winning Texas when you support Bernie who couldn't beat Hillary just about every large state population primary is a telling one.
 
My point is that you act like the only people who are electable nationwide are progressives when there is little evidence that this is the case. Of course you should like people who match your ideology. Your comment about Beto not winning Texas when you support Bernie who couldn't beat Hillary just about every large state population primary is a telling one.

I don’t think AOC is particularly electable nationwide (yet). I just like her politics and energy a lot. Just read my posts, man. I have stated multiple times that I don’t think Bernie is going to make it out of the primary stage. I support him as a politician for the same reasons that I like AOC. Plus, as an American Jew, his presence on the national political scene is really powerful for me.

I don’t love Bernie as a presidential candidate in 2020, though would obviously vote for him if he won the primary. Same, I suppose, goes for Beto. Same, I’m sure, goes for all of us.

Again, I’m a fan of Gillibrand, Harris, and Brown for 2020. I would say that Brown is probably the most ideologically progressive of the bunch. Gillibrand is probably the most ideologically liberal, but I have come to respect her and her moral compass a lot since Trump was elected. She’s honorable.
 
I like Brown a lot. I think he has two problems. The first is his age. Dems haven't won with a guy who is over 60 and hasn't been on the ticket before in around a hundred years. The second is his winning could be problematic in the Senate. With about 2/3 of those up for re-election being GOP, there is a possibility of re-taking the Senate. With a RW GOPer in the state house in Ohio, Brown would be taken by a Republican (I wouldn't be surprised if it would be Kasich).

Maybe we are in an age of bucking historical trends. Trump got elected. A #16 beat a #1 last year. Justify was the first horse since the 19th century to win the KY Derby without running as a 2 yo. Maybe Brown could win, but the odds are not that positive.
 
I think Bernie is a bad choice for President. And I don’t think Bernie has helped build up a national progressive bench. If Bernie is still the best Progressive candidate, he’s done a poor job. If Bernie is the only progressive candidate, he’s no better than Hillary.
Why do you believe Bernie is a bad choice?
 
Bernie has no chance to win. He's too old. Even by 2020, people in swing states are less likely to vote for a person who proudly calls himself anything with socialist in it. You can dream all you like, but that's a no go for the near future nationally.
 
Why do you believe Bernie is a bad choice?

This isn’t important to the argument that he is trying to make and he has already explained this in other posts.

I’d rather Ph show his work for some of the speculation-as-fact points that are central to his argument.
 
Why do you believe Bernie is a bad choice?

There are more appealing people to carry the message. Bernie got traction because he has a good albeit limited Progressive message and he wasn’t Hillary. There should be other more appealing “have a beer with” Progressives with more personality, who have a better track record on guns and minorities who can break through.

I don’t get why people are stuck on him. He has no real advantage unless there are no other Progressives in the race. He did his job by having the balls to face Hillary. If he was any good, he would have beat her like Obama did.

Kennedy - 43
LBJ - 56
Carter - 52
Clinton - 44
Obama - 47

Dems prefer younger nominees. It’s hard to see Democrats rallying around a cantankerous old man from Vermont.


This isn’t important to the argument that he is trying to make and he has already explained this in other posts.

I’d rather Ph show his work for some of the speculation-as-fact points that are central to his argument.

I’m going to go ahead and guess what you think is “speculation-as-fact” is just speculation. Fact isn’t the same as opinion.
 
There are more appealing people to carry the message. Bernie got traction because he has a good albeit limited Progressive message and he wasn’t Hillary. There should be other more appealing “have a beer with” Progressives with more personality, who have a better track record on guns and minorities who can break through.

I don’t get why people are stuck on him. He has no real advantage unless there are no other Progressives in the race. He did his job by having the balls to face Hillary. If he was any good, he would have beat her like Obama did.

Kennedy - 43
LBJ - 56
Carter - 52
Clinton - 44
Obama - 47

Dems prefer younger nominees. It’s hard to see Democrats rallying around a cantankerous old man from Vermont.




I’m going to go ahead and guess what you think is “speculation-as-fact” is just speculation. Fact isn’t the same as opinion.

I have read some of the articles that you were referring to the other day and they’re using extremely small sample sizes to make huge claims about a Bernie faction undercutting Progressive candidates, defined in different ways. There just isn’t that much data to substantiate rhetoric that the media is starting to parrot as fact.
 
It's not just Bernie. It's no Dem who hasn't been on the ticket and is over 60 has won in the past hundred years or so. It could change, because Trump is the opponent. But history isn't on that person's side.

Of those who fit that narrative, only Sherrod Brown really has a chance. Bernie is old and old news. Warren isn't a big enough persona to fight Trump. If Brown was 55 not 68 at the time of the election, I'd be all in for him.
 
Are y’all all Washington/DNC insiders?

From what I can tell, Ph has a weird Bernie thing and mdmh and I have dared questioned Beto’s credentials. Hell, even Creamy and Catamount dig this dude.

Y’all are weird. Sleep it off already.

The dude seems to be a centrist masquerading as a progressive. He would be my first Democrat I've voted for since Obama in 2008, as far as presidential elections go. It says something that he appeals to right leaning moderates like me and Catamount. A guy like Beto, IMO, is the Democrats best chance of winning in 2020. I just can't imagine any universe where Bernie Sanders or another Socialist is elected in the near future.
 
Bernie has no chance to win. He's too old. Even by 2020, people in swing states are less likely to vote for a person who proudly calls himself anything with socialist in it. You can dream all you like, but that's a no go for the near future nationally.

Beat me to it...by 3 hours...Maybe I should read the thread before posting.
 
It’s going to take another decade or so good politics from the DSA and even more time for people to realize the problems in our society are structural problems with capitalism before socialist candidates get national traction.
 
It’s going to take another decade or so good politics from the DSA and even more time for people to realize the problems in our society are structural problems with capitalism before socialist candidates get national traction.

The problem is in that time they are also going to figure out the structural problems of socialism.
 
The problem is in that time they are also going to figure out the structural problems of socialism.

Which are what in your opinion?

Are there problems with our version of capitalism? If so, are they better or worse than socialism?
 
Ph what do you view as poor in Bernie’s track record with minorities? Or that he could do better at?
 
Back
Top