• 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

The WSJ Poll was not rural America and put Bernie 11% under Warren. He was even further behind when first and second choices were included.
 
RJKarl said:
The WSJ Poll was not rural America and put Bernie 11% under Warren. He was even further behind when first and second choices were included.
Click to expand...

I wasn't responding to that post, RJ. I was responding to the Rural America one.
 
PhDeac said:
70408214_2363567290531743_6068050235261714432_o.png


Take it with the appropriate grain of salt given the margin of error and low sample size.

The temporary Harris bump and Biden drop after the first debate continues to be interesting. Harris found a way to move up and damage the leader, but hasn't found a way to sustain it and no one else has found a way to damage Biden.
Click to expand...

Yes the Harris bounce will be confounding for a long time. It’s really interesting to me that she got that bounce and then both moderate and super left campaigns went full attack mode on her CA AG record. I feel like at no point has the moderate side gone after the super left nor vice versa with the same aggression and passion as they both went after Harris. To me it seems like Biden and Sanders/Warren are content to have the semi-high brow policy arguments with each other and let the candidates that have no shot do all their dirty work (see: Castro, Julian), but the one time that another candidate threatened to move into the top tier, the response was swift and harsh from moderate and super left supporters (not necessarily from Biden/Sanders/Warren themselves though).
 
Also it has to be said that Harris tried to thread the Obama needle but is not Obama and flubbed nearly every response to the any sort of backlash she received from the first debate to the second.
 
This sounds vaguely akin to the argument that Bernie Bros made in 2015/16. At the end of the day, Harris has run a pretty miserable campaign. Despite coming into the primary season with a lot of name recognition and positive momentum, she has all but disappeared on the campaign trail. I don't think that there is much of a conspiracy theory here. I think that she's just not a very good presidential candidate, especially given her baggage from her time as AG.
 
Agree with the above. Kamala hasn't made a strong case for herself to be president. She's not that great a campaigner. Her record as an AG raises serious questions. She doesn't perform well aside from set pieces (which taking on Biden certainly was).

Her drop is the less confusing part of that situation. Kamala successfully poked holes in Biden and regained everything he lost rather quickly across a variety of polls.
 
Strickland33 said:
This sounds vaguely akin to the argument that Bernie Bros made in 2015/16. At the end of the day, Harris has run a pretty miserable campaign. Despite coming into the primary season with a lot of name recognition and positive momentum, she has all but disappeared on the campaign trail. I don't think that there is much of a conspiracy theory here. I think that she's just not a very good presidential candidate, especially given her baggage from her time as AG.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean for that to sound like a conspiracy theory or anything, just thought it was intriguing how the post-bounce narratives and such happened. I was high on Harris early but you’re correct that she’s run a bad campaign. I think she should be an excellent candidate and is on paper, but has not shown that she can put it together in practice for more than the occasional sound bite or Twitter video. I’m no longer stanning hard for Kamala, I think that 2020 just isn’t her time and maybe she never gets all the way there. She had a chance and didn’t take it.
 
AsesinoDeTortugas said:
Also it has to be said that Harris tried to thread the Obama needle but is not Obama and flubbed nearly every response to the any sort of backlash she received from the first debate to the second.
Click to expand...

I think with Harris, her drop is the result of a couple of things. She hasn't handled her changes in positions well. But the bigger issue is the way she went after Biden by attacking Obama/Biden. Obama left office with a 57% approval rating and is beloved by most Dems. Trump was crowing after the 1st debate that the Dem candidates were going after Obama more than him. A lot of party folks were openly complaining after that debate, and rightfully so. You can go after Biden on any number of things without attacking Obama, and I think that put off many Dem voters along with the party folks who were complaining. Warren has been much smarter. She didn't get along with the Obama administration well at all while Obama was in office, but she hasn't been openly criticizing him during this campaign and talks more about building on his legacy.

As a practical matter, I see it getting down to a Biden/Warren match, which she'll eventually win. Harris has faded and isn't coming back. If Biden were to fade early, I could see Buttigieg and Booker being possible recipients of his support, and you could see them having improved poll numbers and maybe it coming down to 1 of those 2 v. Warren. But Biden doesn't look like he'll fade fast enough for that to happen.
 
Really I think it comes down to Warren having found and almost completely cornered the market of “progressive, not socialist” Democrat’s, of which there is a sizable chunk. Bernie has his 15% of diehard uber-progressives, Biden has his rock solid 20-25% of moderates and people that aren’t paying close attention, and everyone else has had to try to see what they can do with the other 60%. But in that 60%, there has seemed to be a pretty fine line for what they are looking for in a candidate, and it’s somewhere much further left than Biden but just short of Bernie. Warren has absolutely nailed that spot and has seen steady rising for going on 3-4 months now. For everyone else, especially Harris, they haven’t found what that sweet spot is (or are entirely uninterested in trying to get there). Booker actually probably is the closest to Warren in finding that area but hasn’t caught any real attention for it. Buttigieg and Harris both are a little too far toward Biden and not really committed to the all out progressivism, which I think has caused a lot of voters to lose interest because of a “what’s the point” type of thinking.

Klobuchar, Booker, Beto, and Yang will eventually drop out and that 10% that they have right now will be huge in determining how this race looks going into the meat of the primaries. If that 10% goes to Warren, things get real spicy, real fast. If any significant chunk goes to Biden, then gear up for some really horrible debates and a sleepy, terrible campaign season.
 
So much of this is name recognition. The most interesting polling stat I’ve seen is that the second choice for Biden, Bernie, and Warren supporters is one of the other two.

Harris only went after Biden. That’s probably why it worked.
 
Last edited:
I mean, that is a great answer. Why does anyone need to be able to kill a lot of different people quickly? Or do the mexicans rape people in packs?
 
Forgot to add this. I was visiting family and friends over the weekend and had a 5 minute discussion with my mostly Trump loving sister. She's starting to recognize that maybe Trump isn't that great but watches Fox 24/7. She said there was 1 Dem candidate she liked but couldn't remember her name. I said Tulsi Gabbard? And she said yes. I laughed on the inside. So in addition to RT loving them some Tulsi, I'm guessing Fox must be giving her some praise as well. Which is hilarious considering she's pretty darn liberal in her domestic politics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top