• 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

TownieDeac said:
fuck...and i cannot stress this enough...moderates and independents who'd be scared off by anybody the dems nominate
Click to expand...

This is not true and was proved by Obama. The 2018 election was won by people in many collar districts who are moderates and independents as well as getting out the votes of those under 35.

I don't like any of the Top 4, but it doesn't matter who is the nominee. Everyone has to be on the team to beat Trump. Nothing else matters.
 
Strickland33 said:
This is how I feel about your dude Pete, fwiw. Lots of similarities between Buttigieg and Obama in terms of policy. If you think Castro had a reasonable shot against Cornyn, then why don't you think Buttigieg could beat Todd Young or Mike Braun?
Click to expand...

First of all, Castro had his 2012 convention speech as a launching pad.

Second, I don’t think Castro had a reasonable shot that’s why I said he should have run in 2014 then run for President in 2016. He would have lost valiantly and used that to stay relevant (compared to being HUD Secretary).

This is Pete’s launching pad. If he puts up a good fight and loses, he will give a great speech at the convention and campaign for the candidate. Then he can run for Senate in 2022. He’d be a front runner in 2024 (God forbid) or 2028 when he will be in his mid-40s.
 
Did this dude who said Newt fucking Gingrich would have been a better candidate than Mittens Romney in 2012 just suggest Harris was a better candidate than Abrams because she’s more photogenic? Newt Gingrich looks like the stay puft marshmallow man applying for a small business loan. Then this same cat popped off about how people calling out his bullshit are the problem?

Did dis dude just did dis?
 
TownieDeac said:
Guy: I’m a 62 year old man from Long Island. I look down on everyone who doesn’t own a home and a $60,000 SUV. I live in a working class neighborhood, that means my neighbors are cops and the owners of plumbing firms. Every conversation I have about sports is racist.

Dems: I simply must have this vote.
Click to expand...

The guy in LI doesn't matter. Trump has no shot in NY.

The white, soccer mom in Ardmore, PA does. The black guy who didn't vote in Milwaukee matters. The Hispanic autoworker in Detroit matters.

We need kickass Senate candidates in Iowa, GA and NC to help in those states. We need young progressives to contact Steve Bullock to get him to run in MT.
 
FDDeacon said:
People like you are why Trump is going to win again. I don't know who the Democratic nominee will finally be, but it is not going to be Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Even President Obama has said that he would intervene if it looked like Sanders was going to win the nomination. And Sanders is more honest, reliable & likable than Warren.

HoosierDeac nailed it in a post above this one. Whether or not we can defeat Trump will depend to a large degree upon what disgruntled Sanders & Warren supporters do when they realize that their candidate is not going to be the nominee.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, you don't know who the Democratic nominee will be, but you also do. Galaxy brain stuff, right there. I see that you don't think Warren is likeable. Is there a female candidate that you think brings something to the table beyond being "photogenic?"

Also, people like me canvass and phone bank for whoever ends up with a D next to their name on the ballot, so I think you're a bit off there.
 
RJKarl said:
The guy in LI doesn't matter. Trump has no shot in NY.

The white, soccer mom in Ardmore, PA does. The black guy who didn't vote in Milwaukee matters. The Hispanic autoworker in Detroit matters.

We need kickass Senate candidates in Iowa, GA and NC to help in those states. We need young progressives to contact Steve Bullock to get him to run in MT.
Click to expand...

You're talking about two different types of voters. The first voter voted for Trump. Seeing as Trump's approval ratings are really high among folks who voted him the first time, I'm not sure that that's a voter worth targeting in 2020. The latter two, though, definitely are, though based on how I understand electoral dynamics I would guess that the Hispanic autoworker in Detroit voted.

As is always the case (and as the "electability" canard intentionally obscures), the winning strategy in 2020 is voter turnout. Get out the vote, win the election. It's that simple.

ETA: RJ, you could also contact Steve Bullock to get him to run in MT. Why do you think his mind could be changed, btw?
 
RJKarl said:
This is not true and was proved by Obama. The 2018 election was won by people in many collar districts who are moderates and independents as well as getting out the votes of those under 35.

I don't like any of the Top 4, but it doesn't matter who is the nominee. Everyone has to be on the team to beat Trump. Nothing else matters.
Click to expand...

sorry but isn't this exactly what i was saying?
 
RJKarl said:
The guy in LI doesn't matter. Trump has no shot in NY.

The white, soccer mom in Ardmore, PA does. The black guy who didn't vote in Milwaukee matters. The Hispanic autoworker in Detroit matters.
Click to expand...

lol yes, you're making my point!
 
HoosierDeac said:
I'm telling you it has to be Biden. He would play the best in the must-get states (MI, WI, PA, et al) and is middle of the road enough to not scare off moderate/independents like some of the more progressive candidates might. Do you really need someone to "fire up the base"? Isn't Trump enough? If not, then you deserve what you get.
Click to expand...

Due to Biden's name recognition and association with Obama, and not due to some of the strange things he utters, yes, Biden certainly has polled the broadest and best thus far in battleground state polls. He's not only competitive in MI, PA and WI, but is more competitive than the others in states like NC, FL, NV, AZ and even TX & GA. Buttigieg has polled well in the 3 midwestern states, poorly in the southern states but better in AZ than Sanders, Warren or even Biden. He's also doing particularly well in IA both in Dem nomination polling and v. Trump. That tends to make sense as his being gay is a bigger deal in the south than it is in the mountain west (which trends more libertarian) or midwest. Warren and Sanders have generally polled as well as Biden and Buttigieg in the midwest, but they haven't polled well in the south or AZ. That also tends to make sense because their brands of progressive populism you would expect would play well in the midwest but not as well in the south or AZ. The other piece of polling information I've noted is that WI has been a bit peculiar. All 4 Dems were polling well v. Trump a few months ago, however a couple of recent polls have had Trump leading all 4. I have zero idea why this may be.

I haven't mentioned the other candidates because there haven't been many, if any, state polls with their numbers v. Trump, and frankly, none of them have polled at 5% or more on a consistent basis. Barring a serious medical or other setback of 1 of our 70+ year olds, I would suggest we appear to have our final 4 as a practical matter. And the apparent premise of Bloomberg's campaign is that Biden will do well early and choke in March, so that he'll be there to pick up the pieces (I think a dubious premise for someone who was until recently a Pub and who used to donate to Pub campaigns). And while the polling numbers can and may change, it doesn't "have" to be Biden to get to 270. He certainly offers the best chance to get well over 300 EVs. But that's also provided he can make it to next November in 1 coherent piece, and don't we all openly wonder about that? The other 3 have plausible paths to 270, though probably not a whole lot more than that. And Obama would rout Trump, but he can't run, and it's nice that he can recognize legal restrictions.
 
FD thinks being photogenic matters. I guess the VP should either be Alyssa Milano or Rosario Dawson. Each is a progressive. Each is very involved. Maybe Dawson would do better than her boyfriend.
 
I don’t know that FD is endorsing the photogenic comment but of course all else (close to) equal looks matter. It’s bullshit but it’s true. True for both sexes, but much more so for women.

I am a big Abrams fan and think she got jobbed in GA. She has a bright future.
 
FDDeacon said:
If you feel that strongly about Stacey Abrams it looks like you would at least know her name. In any event, I feel that Kamala Harris would be a much better VP candidate than Stacey Abrams....for several reasons. 1) Harris is more photogenic. Ridicule that if you wish, but it would be a factor. 2) Harris is better known. The fact that you didn't even know Abrams' name is a testament to that. 3) Harris is better qualified to become president, which would be an important factor when paired with what would be a 78-year old President Biden.
Click to expand...

One thing Abrams has going for her is she hasn’t locked up parents for truancy or mocked activists who prefer investing in public education vs jails.
 
I mean you take any two candidates regardless of gender with the exact same resume and the one who's more photogenic is going to have an advantage. That's just life.
 
bmoneydeac said:
I don’t know that FD is endorsing the photogenic comment but of course all else (close to) equal looks matter. It’s bullshit but it’s true. True for both sexes, but much more so for women.

I am a big Abrams fan and think she got jobbed in GA. She has a bright future.
Click to expand...

Agree with everything you said. But it's not just looks, it's also charisma. Warren, Abrans and Harris are all pretty charismatic, whereas 1 of the candidates who I've liked, Klobuchar, is pretty low in charisma, which I think explains to a large extent why has never quite caught on. The 1 candidate I haven't gotten this election season is Booker, who is both good looking and charismatic (and with a popular and good looking girlfriend), and he hasn't caught on at all either. He's the equivalent of 1970s Jerry Brown dating Linda Ronstadt.

Agree about Abrams but would really like to see her run for 1 of the 2 senate seats this year. She may come up short, but it would help put both senate races and the state in play for the general. I don't think waiting to see if someone selects her for veep is the best option.
 
bmoneydeac said:
I don’t know that FD is endorsing the photogenic comment but of course all else (close to) equal looks matter. It’s bullshit but it’s true. True for both sexes, but much more so for women.

I am a big Abrams fan and think she got jobbed in GA. She has a bright future.
Click to expand...

He's welcome to clarify his position, but to say that Harris is a better VP prospect because she's photogenic is a pretty misogynistic statement in and of itself. People and mainstream culture are generally pretty horrible when it comes to treatment and evaluation of professional women, but individuals can choose to embrace or reject whether they're going to endorse criteria like photogenic/electable or however else we're choosing to rhetorically denigrating women politicians on the boards these days.

ChrisL68 said:
I mean you take any two candidates regardless of gender with the exact same resume and the one who's more photogenic is going to have an advantage. That's just life.
Click to expand...

I know that you like to "own the progs" and generally disagree with everything that I say, but would you pick Harris over Adams because she's more photogenic? Do you think that's a good way to pick between those two candidates?

I know that most people are sexist pigs. Rather than going with "that's just life," you may want to consider bmoney's "it's bullshit"-qualifier.
 
RJKarl said:
That's not at all what you said. You said Dems care about the guy in LI and they don't.
Click to expand...

That’s the message you’re advocating/audience you’re selling, which is to say the undecided Trump lean. Apart from the soccer mom in Ardmore, Bernie’s audience is the other two personas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top