General politics

[Mike Sixel]

 

Yes and no. They kept the Senate in part b/c of the map. If the GOP senators were up for election in Ohio, Iowa, NC or Maine, the Senate might have flipped. And they won 40 seats in the House. Huge wave. I do think the Dems can get the rural white voters back but they have to have a comprehensive plan for that.

 Iowa? I doubt it. I'll believe that when I see it. 

[ashbury]

Yes and no. They kept the Senate in part b/c of the map. If the GOP senators were up for election in Ohio, Iowa, NC or Maine, the Senate might have flipped. And they won 40 seats in the House. Huge wave. I do think the Dems can get the rural white voters back but they have to have a comprehensive plan for that.

I meant to say "House" where I said "Congress". The senate electoral map was a special case that, as you say, would have gone differently with either of the other two biennial "classes".

 

Still, a wave that narrowly wrested control of the House isn't what you might hope for when a party is that badly tainted by scandal. GOP house candidates collectively drew more than 40% of the vote, and it bears asking just what it is that causes 40% of the electorate to stick so closely to a party in such a dire state of moral decay.

 

And I disagree very strongly that the problem is the lack of a comprehensive plan, if you mean a clearer party platform. Democrats are known for wonk policy proposals for every issue under the sun. They could cobble some more of those together for the next election, and it wouldn't move the needle much from where it is now, because voters know generally where the two parties stand on most everything.

 

If you mean a comprehensive plan to change their "brand", for lack of a better term, then yeah.

 

There may be 20% of the electorate that will vote for any autocratic conservative, and I can live with that, much as the other side can live with the 20% who lean socialist. What's needed for Democrats is a concerted effort to make sure that the persuadable middle spectrum doesn't feel looked down upon. That's why they vote Republican even when they can see that the Democratic "elites" they are voting against are often just regular folk who made good, as opposed to the actual elites like Jared Kushner descending from a long line of moneyed interests. It's baffling.. except that you can learn from the applause lines spoken by Wharton School's Donald Trump or Harvard Law School's Ted Cruz. They lay it out, right in plain sight, if the Democrats will listen.

[gunnarthor]

 

I meant to say "House" where I said "Congress". The senate electoral map was a special case that, as you say, would have gone differently with either of the other two biennial "classes".

 

Still, a wave that narrowly wrested control of the House isn't what you might hope for when a party is that badly tainted by scandal. GOP house candidates collectively drew more than 40% of the vote, and it bears asking just what it is that causes 40% of the electorate to stick so closely to a party in such a dire state of moral decay.

 

And I disagree very strongly that the problem is the lack of a comprehensive plan, if you mean a clearer party platform. Democrats are known for wonk policy proposals for every issue under the sun. They could cobble some more of those together for the next election, and it wouldn't move the needle much from where it is now, because voters know generally where the two parties stand on most everything.

 

If you mean a comprehensive plan to change their "brand", for lack of a better term, then yeah.

 

There may be 20% of the electorate that will vote for any autocratic conservative, and I can live with that, much as the other side can live with the 20% who lean socialist. What's needed for Democrats is a concerted effort to make sure that the persuadable middle spectrum doesn't feel looked down upon. That's why they vote Republican even when they can see that the Democratic "elites" they are voting against are often just regular folk who made good, as opposed to the actual elites like Jared Kushner descending from a long line of moneyed interests. It's baffling.. except that you can learn from the applause lines spoken by Wharton School's Donald Trump or Harvard Law School's Ted Cruz. They lay it out, right in plain sight, if the Democrats will listen.

Yep, branding. For better or worse, Democratic candidates are perceived as having to be electable in NY and CA regardless of where they are campaigning. I was pretty angry that the party didn't do much to protect and help Donnelly in Indiana. Yeah, it was a tough campaign for him but the party could have done more.

 

I live in Southern MN and Hagedorn (ugh) ran constant ads against Feehan being a elitist left coast liberal when that wasn't really true. The party needs to figure out how to brand better when they are working in red areas. They also need to present actual plans to help these areas. For all the Russia talk, people in rural areas voted against Clinton in large part b/c the Obama economy improvements didn't come to the rural areas. There are real actions the party could do to help but they've been pretty silent on that.

[gunnarthor]

George Will article on Sherrod Brown. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-candidate-may-be-the-optimum-challenger-to-trump-in-2020/2018/12/12/86fb4a60-fd7c-11e8-862a-b6a6f3ce8199_story.html?utm_term=.61512badaaa7

 

I like Brown a lot and think any Dem that can keep Ohio in play should be one of the top candidates for the job. The fact that he seems to rub Will the wrong way only improves his standing in my eyes.

[PseudoSABR]

 

George Will article on Sherrod Brown. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-candidate-may-be-the-optimum-challenger-to-trump-in-2020/2018/12/12/86fb4a60-fd7c-11e8-862a-b6a6f3ce8199_story.html?utm_term=.61512badaaa7

 

I like Brown a lot and think any Dem that can keep Ohio in play should be one of the top candidates for the job. The fact that he seems to rub Will the wrong way only improves his standing in my eyes.

I've always liked Brown for many of the reasons Will lists here.  He seems authentic, smart, and non-elite.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I've always liked Brown for many of the reasons Will lists here.  He seems authentic, smart, and non-elite.

 

My biggest concern is.....does he close the gap with Trump?  How many voters of Trump would flip to him and do the Bernie stalwarts show up?

 

I like him, I just wonder if he's enough of a contrast to Trump.  I think he makes authentic emotional appeals...that's my biggest draw with him as a candidate.

[Musk21]

 

My biggest concern is.....does he close the gap with Trump?  How many voters of Trump would flip to him and do the Bernie stalwarts show up?

 

I like him, I just wonder if he's enough of a contrast to Trump.  I think he makes authentic emotional appeals...that's my biggest draw with him as a candidate.

 

Brown would be a fantastic Democratic nominee. He would wipe the floor with Trump in the debates (if Trump even goes through with the debates this time). Would worry that he might get lost among a crowded field of more recognizable names.

 

At this point, if he runs, looking to me that the nominee will be Beto O'Rourke. I think Dems want to replicate the inspiration that Obama brought in 2008.

 

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Brown would be a fantastic Democratic nominee. He would wipe the floor with Trump in the debates (if Trump even goes through with the debates this time). Would worry that he might get lost among a crowded field of more recognizable names.

 

At this point, if he runs, looking to me that the nominee will be Beto O'Rourke. I think Dems want to replicate the inspiration that Obama brought in 2008.

 

It's not about his ability to out-debate Trump, just that he'd have to pull voters away from Trump in order to win.  Is that even possible?  And if so, is Brown the guy to do that?

[PseudoSABR]

 

It's not about his ability to out-debate Trump, just that he'd have to pull voters away from Trump in order to win.  Is that even possible?  And if so, is Brown the guy to do that?

I think he has the same kind of appeal that Bernie has, authentically speaks to working class values yet doesn't have the "socialist" baggage that Bernie has.  He won in Ohio by 9 pts when Trump won by like 7 pts; that's a huge swing.  

 

And I still don't know that the Dems need to persuade Trump voters; I think Clinton failed to turn people out for two reasons 1) she was lame 2) her victory was a forgone conclusion.   Personally, I know plenty of people who didn't vote for either, but will definitely be voting against Trump (yes, anecdotal).

 

That said, I think Beto probably would have wider appeal given his youth and likability.   He did well having lots of national exposure, so I don't think the primaries would show some hidden flaw.  

[TheLeviathan]

 

I think he has the same kind of appeal that Bernie has, authentically speaks to working class values yet doesn't have the "socialist" baggage that Bernie has.  He won in Ohio by 9 pts when Trump won by like 7 pts; that's a huge swing.  

 

And I still don't know that the Dems need to persuade Trump voters; I think Clinton failed to turn people out for two reasons 1) she was lame 2) her victory was a forgone conclusion.   Personally, I know plenty of people who didn't vote for either, but will definitely be voting against Trump (yes, anecdotal).

 

That said, I think Beto probably would have wider appeal given his youth and likability.   He did well having lots of national exposure, so I don't think the primaries would show some hidden flaw.  

 

They're going to have to flip some voters or bring in new ones in a handful of states or they won't win.  I'm not anti-Sherrod or anything, but these are the questions the Dems need to ask themselves.

 

As much as it's fun to scapegoat Hillary, the problems run deeper than that.

[gunnarthor]

 

They're going to have to flip some voters or bring in new ones in a handful of states or they won't win.  I'm not anti-Sherrod or anything, but these are the questions the Dems need to ask themselves.

 

As much as it's fun to scapegoat Hillary, the problems run deeper than that.

I think you're right but that's a reason to support Brown. He did show that he can win Ohio which is huge. If he's flipping Trump voters in Ohio (which he clearly must have done), then he can flip those voters in WI and MI back as well. I don't think the Dems are going to ignore the midwest like they did in 2016 and the election results in the rust belt were pretty encouraging for Dems in 2018.

[Squirrel]

 

Brown would be a fantastic Democratic nominee. He would wipe the floor with Trump in the debates (if Trump even goes through with the debates this time). Would worry that he might get lost among a crowded field of more recognizable names.

 

At this point, if he runs, looking to me that the nominee will be Beto O'Rourke. I think Dems want to replicate the inspiration that Obama brought in 2008.

I wonder what a pairing Brown (Pres) - O'Rourke (VP) would be like? I like both, but I think after Trump, we'd need a figure that would be more ... stablizing(?) than inspiration at this point ... which I think would be Brown. Then O'Rourke, the inspiration, would be nicely set up after that, whether or not Brown would win ...

 

Or Brown - Harris?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I was about to say that O'Rourke's lack of experience is concerning. Then I checked and he's been a U.S. Rep; I had it in my mind he was a state rep. I bet he could flip Texas, but his youth might work against him in a campaign like that. But then winning a primary would be to pass a good test. I hope he runs.

[Squirrel]

 

I was about to say that O'Rourke's lack of experience is concerning. Then I checked and he's been a U.S. Rep; I had it in my mind he was a state rep. I bet he could flip Texas, but his youth might work against him in a campaign like that. But then winning a primary would be to pass a good test. I hope he runs.

That's why I think you pair him with someone like Brown.

[PseudoSABR]

 

They're going to have to flip some voters or bring in new ones in a handful of states or they won't win.  I'm not anti-Sherrod or anything, but these are the questions the Dems need to ask themselves.

 

As much as it's fun to scapegoat Hillary, the problems run deeper than that.

Part of my point is that Brown, perhaps like Bernie, appeals to that white working class.  We just disagree on the Hillary effect, and the nature of the problems within the democratic party.  I think there was lots of fishiness, suckers for conspiracy, etc. in 2016 that won't present itself in the same way in 2020. 

 

Clearly, there are systemic problems within the Democratic party, many of which make me cringe, but post-2016, the party does seem to be organizing around progressive values and messages, and although to the chagrin of many, I think is a good thing, because it's an authentic take, and not the elitist threading of the needle.  

[PseudoSABR]

 

I was about to say that O'Rourke's lack of experience is concerning. Then I checked and he's been a U.S. Rep; I had it in my mind he was a state rep. I bet he could flip Texas, but his youth might work against him in a campaign like that. But then winning a primary would be to pass a good test. I hope he runs.

I can't imagine him not running at this point.  If he doesn't run, it will be to announce a VP pledge to another candidate (heck, this might be a really good idea).  

[Musk21]

New CNN Poll out today on 2020 Democractic candidates. Hillary had a HUGE lead on Obama, Edwards, etc. in the early stages of 2008, so I know polls at this point are meaningless, but still interesting.

 

Possible Democratic candidates                Dec. 6-9, 2018       Oct. 4-7, 2018

Former Vice President Joe Biden                           30%                 33%
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders                           14%                13%
Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke                                         9%                  4%
New Jersey Senator Cory Booker                            5%                  5%
California Senator Kamala Harris                             4%                  9%
Former Secretary of State John Kerry                     4%                   5%
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren               3%                   8%
Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg     3%                  4%
Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar                          3%                  1%
Former Attorney General Eric Holder                       1%                  3%
New York Senator Kirstin Gillibrand                          1%                  1%
Montana Governor Steve Bullock                             1%                     *
Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown                                   1%                   N/A
Washington Governor Jay Inslee                              1%                   N/A
Former Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe                 1%                  N/A

[gunnarthor]

 

That's why I think you pair him with someone like Brown.

Re: Brown, that's my guess. He doesn't get the nomination but he'll be the VP. He almost took it in 2016.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Part of my point is that Brown, perhaps like Bernie, appeals to that white working class.  We just disagree on the Hillary effect, and the nature of the problems within the democratic party.  I think there was lots of fishiness, suckers for conspiracy, etc. in 2016 that won't present itself in the same way in 2020. 

 

Part of Bernie's appeal was novelty: An old dude talking to millenials.  I'm not sure how well Brown fits that mold.  

 

He's more of the old school successful Democrat.  A guy I like a lot who is authentic and blue collar.  But that is precisely why he's unlikely to make a good candidate.  No one wants that, least of all the left.  They should, if they were smart....but they don't.

 

He's much more Tim Kaine than he is Bernie.  And how did the left talk about Kaine after the election?

[gunnarthor]

 

 

 

He's more of the old school successful Democrat.  A guy I like a lot who is authentic and blue collar.  But that is precisely why he's unlikely to make a good candidate.  No one wants that, least of all the left.  They should, if they were smart....but they don't.

Why do you think the left doesn't want that? I think they'd be quite fine with him. He might not be their first choice but they wouldn't abandon him like some of them abandoned HRC.

 

I think he'd make a great candidate. He's already shown he can run a successful campaign in a red state. He's liberal on most issues. He's not the most charismatic guy but  that might not be that bad either. I'm not sure he'll win the nomination but I think he'll be one of the last guys standing. He's not another Martin O'Malley, for sure.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Part of Bernie's appeal was novelty: An old dude talking to millenials.  I'm not sure how well Brown fits that mold.  

 

He's more of the old school successful Democrat.  A guy I like a lot who is authentic and blue collar.  But that is precisely why he's unlikely to make a good candidate.  No one wants that, least of all the left.  They should, if they were smart....but they don't.

 

He's much more Tim Kaine than he is Bernie.  And how did the left talk about Kaine after the election?

Brown's been on my radar as a true-liberal for more than a decade.  I've never thought of him like Kaine, Clinton, Kerry or Gore.

[Musk21]

 

Why do you think the left doesn't want that? I think they'd be quite fine with him. He might not be their first choice but they wouldn't abandon him like some of them abandoned HRC.

 

I think he'd make a great candidate. He's already shown he can run a successful campaign in a red state. He's liberal on most issues. He's not the most charismatic guy but  that might not be that bad either. I'm not sure he'll win the nomination but I think he'll be one of the last guys standing. He's not another Martin O'Malley, for sure.

 

I'd say a good comparison would be pre-VP Joe Biden, who finished 5th in the 2008 Iowa Caucus with 1% of the vote and dropped out of the race.  Despite having been a Senator for 34 years, "A September 18, 2007 poll had found that 56% of respondents had not heard enough about Biden to form an opinion about him."

 

I bet Brown will have the same problem.

[gunnarthor]

 

I'd say a good comparison would be pre-VP Joe Biden, who finished 5th in the 2008 Iowa Caucus with 1% of the vote and dropped out of the race.  Despite having been a Senator for 34 years, "A September 18, 2007 poll had found that 56% of respondents had not heard enough about Biden to form an opinion about him."

 

I bet Brown will have the same problem.

You could be right. I hope not, but, yeah. That could definitely happen.

[gunnarthor]

Klobuchar is almost certainly running and got a brief write up in Politico about the left behind voters.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/14/klobuchar-dem-nominee-2020-left-behind-voters-1065225

[TheLeviathan]

 

Why do you think the left doesn't want that? I think they'd be quite fine with him. He might not be their first choice but they wouldn't abandon him like some of them abandoned HRC.

 

I think he'd make a great candidate. He's already shown he can run a successful campaign in a red state. He's liberal on most issues. He's not the most charismatic guy but  that might not be that bad either. I'm not sure he'll win the nomination but I think he'll be one of the last guys standing. He's not another Martin O'Malley, for sure.

 

I want to say again: I like Sherrod Brown.  I'd vote for him.  

 

But he has little or no recognition.  He deliberately talks to blue collar whites and, as some here have demonstrated time and time again, there is a segment of the liberal base that bristles at that almost immediately.  (Not you, you've been pretty clear that you recognize that need) He isn't particularly charismatic.  He'd kick ass in a town forum or a meet and greet at the state fair....but in a national campaign does he move the needle with people?  Does he sway them away?

 

Maybe.  But when I consider that question, but gut reaction is not overwhelmingly positive.

[PseudoSABR]

Since we've been debating the issue; here's CNN's most recent rankings

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/13/politics/2020-rankings-presidential/index.html

[LaBombo]

"We Democrats know so much [that is true!], that we have to kind of tell everyone how smart we are..."

 

 

... Senator Hirono captures one aspect of it (which the GOP spin machine already has distorted into an expression of pure elitism):

 

 

 

My first reaction to your take on Mazie Hirono's gaffe was ' "Spin!?!" How could anyone come up with a way to 'distort' those words to make them any more damaging for Hirono and her party ?'

 

But setting politics aside for just a second... Honestly, have you ever known anyone personally who bragged about how smart they are? If so... were they?  I'd think not, but more to the point... did it make them seem smart ?

 

Or did it just make them seem like a complete and utter j****$$ ?

 

Yes, Hirono started out trying to make a point about head vs. heart, and that's completely fine. But not only did she not stop there, she blew right past her tone-deaf celebration of Democrats' superior intellect and went on to frame it as a burden when they're forced to attempt to enlighten Repubs and independents.

 

Elitism? I think that if you're a Democrat strategist looking ahead to 2020, you watch that clip with your palm on your forehead, hoping that people see it as painting your party as just garden-variety elitists, instead of a party filled with insufferable self-proclaimed Brainiacs who've been dying to explain just how much their heads hurt from the strain of talking down to the rest of us.

 

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

"We Democrats know so much [that is true!], that we have to kind of tell everyone how smart we are..."

 

 

 

My first reaction to your take on Mazie Hirono's gaffe was ' "Spin!?!" How could anyone come up with a way to 'distort' those words to make them any more damaging for Hirono and her party ?'

 

But setting politics aside for just a second... Honestly, have you ever known anyone personally who bragged about how smart they are? If so... were they?  I'd think not, but more to the point... did it make them seem smart ?

 

Or did it just make them seem like a complete and utter j****$$ ?

 

Yes, Hirono started out trying to make a point about head vs. heart, and that's completely fine. But not only did she not stop there, she blew right past her tone-deaf celebration of Democrats' superior intellect and went on to frame it as a burden when they're forced to attempt to enlighten Repubs and independents.

 

Elitism? I think that if you're a Democrat strategist looking ahead to 2020, you watch that clip with your palm on your forehead, hoping that people see it as painting your party as just garden-variety elitists, instead of a party filled with insufferable self-proclaimed Brainiacs who've been dying to explain just how much their heads hurt from the strain of talking down to the rest of us.

Your reading seems awfully strained to me.  (That the Democrats are "smart" is not mutually exclusive to Republicans being smart too).

 

It is a burden if you can't bring to bear your education and intellectual accomplishments for fear of being framed as speaking down to people.  Anti-intellectualism is abhorrent.  Yes, humility is important, but it's also a great thing to have really smart and educated people running things as important as our government (case and point POTUS).

 

Somehow, conservatives evade criticism of elitism when bragging about their business and wealth accomplishments, and literally speak down to everyone. (Trump isn't the only example of this, simply the most salient; the talking-down-rhetoric is what Rush Limbaugh has been doing for a generation).  There's something more going on here than a lack of humility that the conservative base decries intellect so consistently.   I mean how did Ben Sasse ever get elected to the Senate, with gasp, a PhD from Yale (conservatives are fine with their own elites, it's just the other tribe's elites they have a problem with).  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

He's much more Tim Kaine than he is Bernie.  And how did the left talk about Kaine after the election?

Lots of us screamed about how awful a pick Kaine was before the election for the reasons you listed above, if that counts for anything.

[gunnarthor]

Texas judge rules ACA unconstitutional, putting the health care of millions of Americans in jeopardy. President is happily tweeting about it.