• 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

I've said it before, but I wouldn't be shocked if Biden drops out in the fall. If his lead dwindles, he'll quit rather than getting beat.
 
cville deac said:
The Dem party has been a mix of economic centrists and economic progressives, most all of whom are socially liberal for some time now. However, your assertion that economic centrist have failed time after time is incorrect historically. Over the last 50 years, 3 Dems who were more from the economic progressive wing of the party have secured the nomination: McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis. And they each got trounced. Economic centrist Dems are 5-4 over that same period in the EC, and 7-2 in the popular vote. And if you look at the results of the 2018 midterms, the Dems picked up 42 seats in the house. The vast majority of these pick-ups were in purple or reddish purple districts by more centrist Dems. Folks like AOC and Omar may get most of the liberal and conservative press, but they won safe blue districts. Take VA as an example. Wexton picked up VA-10 because this district has turned from reddish purple to bluish purple by the population growth in NOVA. Luria picked up VA-2 (R+3), and Spanberger picked up VA-7 (R+6), both of which had been in Pub hands for almost all of the last 20 years. They're both more centrists, Luria being ex military, and Spanberger ex CIA. A more liberal former NPR and NBC reporter ran in my VA-5 (R+6) and lost easily. Just 5 years ago, VA was 8-3 Pub and is now 7-4 Dem thanks to a court invalidating 1 district and 2 blue dogs. So there is your evidence.

And this year, the states we have to win the majority of are: NV, AZ, IA, MI, WI, PA, VA, NC, FL and NH. Not exactly a collection of the most liberal states. I'm not sure at this point who is best poised to beat Trump and don't have a crystal ball. Maybe it is well past time to run liberally economically. But history certainly does not support your thesis. The other thing that worries me next year is I believe the Dem nominee will have to win the popular vote by 5-8 points just to get a narrow EC victory (because Trump is extremely unpopular in blue states, and the Pub majorities are getting closer in large population red states like FL, TX, NC and GA). Trump is committing crimes and shitting on the constitution but still has a decent shot at getting reelected next year.
Click to expand...

who knew this would come up
 
cville deac said:
The Dem party has been a mix of economic centrists and economic progressives, most all of whom are socially liberal for some time now. However, your assertion that economic centrist have failed time after time is incorrect historically. Over the last 50 years, 3 Dems who were more from the economic progressive wing of the party have secured the nomination: McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis. And they each got trounced. Economic centrist Dems are 5-4 over that same period in the EC, and 7-2 in the popular vote. And if you look at the results of the 2018 midterms, the Dems picked up 42 seats in the house. The vast majority of these pick-ups were in purple or reddish purple districts by more centrist Dems. Folks like AOC and Omar may get most of the liberal and conservative press, but they won safe blue districts. Take VA as an example. Wexton picked up VA-10 because this district has turned from reddish purple to bluish purple by the population growth in NOVA. Luria picked up VA-2 (R+3), and Spanberger picked up VA-7 (R+6), both of which had been in Pub hands for almost all of the last 20 years. They're both more centrists, Luria being ex military, and Spanberger ex CIA. A more liberal former NPR and NBC reporter ran in my VA-5 (R+6) and lost easily. Just 5 years ago, VA was 8-3 Pub and is now 7-4 Dem thanks to a court invalidating 1 district and 2 blue dogs. So there is your evidence.

And this year, the states we have to win the majority of are: NV, AZ, IA, MI, WI, PA, VA, NC, FL and NH. Not exactly a collection of the most liberal states. I'm not sure at this point who is best poised to beat Trump and don't have a crystal ball. Maybe it is well past time to run liberally economically. But history certainly does not support your thesis. The other thing that worries me next year is I believe the Dem nominee will have to win the popular vote by 5-8 points just to get a narrow EC victory (because Trump is extremely unpopular in blue states, and the Pub majorities are getting closer in large population red states like FL, TX, NC and GA). Trump is committing crimes and shitting on the constitution but still has a decent shot at getting reelected next year.
Click to expand...

just stfu about virginia already, man, good lord
 
We're also in a far different world than we were in the '80s. Income inequality has grown at absurd rates, the economy continues to work for the 1% and that's about it. Extreme capitalism at its worst.

Maybe we aren't at the breaking point yet (even though we should be), but it's coming.

Don't really see why running on a progressive economic message is a bad idea in areas like the Rust Belt and upper Midwest, where Hillary lost the election in 2016
 
Last edited:
Then fucking dispute the historical argument or analyze the 2018 gains made in states like NJ, PA and TX. I picked VA as an example because I know it.

RJ, I agree Biden could drop out if he starts to fade. You gotta be concerned about age when it comes to him or Bernie. I am a bit underwhelmed with the Dem field, though not as underwhelmed as I was in 2016 when it was Hillary, Bernie and MOM.
 
cville deac said:
Then fucking dispute the historical argument or analyze the 2018 gains made in states like NJ, PA and TX. I picked VA as an example because I know it.

RJ, I agree Biden could drop out if he starts to fade. You gotta be concerned about age when it comes to him or Bernie. I am a bit underwhelmed with the Dem field, though not as underwhelmed as I was in 2016 when it was Hillary, Bernie and MOM.
Click to expand...

Underwhelmed? I think it's a pretty strong field given that the Clintons spent 24 years plowing the field to set up Hillary.
 
Biden's announcement bounce has faded and he has settled into a nice polling lead. I am curious what magical occurance is going to happen before fall that will cause his support base to all abandon him. That seems like wishful thinking.

Somebody might end up beating him, but it would be a long slog.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Biden's announcement bounce has faded and he has settled into a nice polling lead. I am curious what magical occurance is going to happen before fall that will cause his support base to all abandon him. That seems like wishful thinking.

Somebody might end up beating him, but it would be a long slog.
Click to expand...

Maybe once he starts making the dumb and out-of-touch comments he's been making on a daily basis to a large audience it'll start hurting him? Or that people realize he doesn't really stand for anything besides a clamoring for "bipartisanship" that doesn't exist?

And again:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e..._democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

June 27, 2015 - Hillary 62.5%, Sanders 12.4%
April 13, 2016 - Hillary 46.8%, Sanders 45.8%
 
One or more of the candidates should go at Bernie to make him lose his temper. It's not that hard to do. If he does it a couple of times in debates, he'll lose a ton of support. He'll be seen as a "get off my lawn" old fart and that could destroy his candidacy.
 
Bernie's good at directing his anger at the right places, he's not one to get personal with other candidates. I don't think that'll happen
 
ChrisL68 said:
Biden's announcement bounce has faded and he has settled into a nice polling lead. I am curious what magical occurance is going to happen before fall that will cause his support base to all abandon him. That seems like wishful thinking.

Somebody might end up beating him, but it would be a long slog.
Click to expand...

That the thing. He doesn't have a support base. He has people who have settled for him while they check out the rest of the field.
 
wsc8521s said:
Maybe once he starts making the dumb and out-of-touch comments he's been making on a daily basis to a large audience it'll start hurting him? Or that people realize he doesn't really stand for anything besides a clamoring for "bipartisanship" that doesn't exist?

And again:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e..._democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

June 27, 2015 - Hillary 62.5%, Sanders 12.4%
April 13, 2016 - Hillary 46.8%, Sanders 45.8%
Click to expand...

HRC comfortably won the nomination. I am sure Biden will make plenty of comments that will hackle progressives between now and then
 
PhDeac said:
Underwhelmed? I think it's a pretty strong field given that the Clintons spent 24 years plowing the field to set up Hillary.
Click to expand...

I don't see a silver bullet who I am near certain can beat Trump. If Biden has staying power and can avoid some of the missteps he's already made (he should have used someone like McCain as an example of reaching across the isle instead of segregationists), then maybe he can. But at his age, I'm not convinced. If Bernie is the candidate, I can't wait for the attack ads of his honeymoon in the Soviet Union or partying with Daniel Ortega. I'm similarly worried of Warren's ability to win the swing states I listed above. I think she has a good shot at PA, MI and WI, but she could also throw away states like VA and NV. I'm frankly disappointed in Harris, who was 1 of the folks I was prepared to like. And while I really like Pete, is America really ready to elect someone who is gay and whose political experience stops at mayor of South Bend? And none of the other 19 have registered an electoral pulse, well except Beto who had one but no longer does. (Tell Schumer to forget trying to recruit Beto and recruit Castro instead.)
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised people haven't made a bigger deal about the amendment that would have allowed segregated classrooms even in schools that had busing to bring minority students to all white schools. If it was brought up, it could be a shot across the bow.
 
ChrisL68 said:
HRC comfortably won the nomination. I am sure Biden will make plenty of comments that will hackle progressives between now and then
Click to expand...

Pretty cool that both Pubs and Boomer Dems are only really interested in triggering the libs these days.
 
TownieDeac said:
Pretty cool that both Pubs and Boomer Dems are only really interested in triggering the libs these days.
Click to expand...

I want to beat Trump. I think you think you have the prescription to do so, but I don't see it.
 
Thing that fucks me up is the two best candidates (Warren, Sanders) from a policy perspective are old and haven't done a terrific job with Gen Z/millennial outreach, PLUS boomers have convinced themselves they have the key to "electability" which is just the Democrats they're used to, of which there are several in the technocrat mold, and the ones that really suck from a policy perspective (Beto, Biden, Booker, Gabbard) are the ones the establishment wants more than anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top