2020 Presidential Election

[PseudoSABR]

Beto enters the race. Will Biden?

[Mike Sixel]

Beto.....does he have any policies? Or is he just a guy that looks and sounds good? Really, I've been boycotting the news about the race mostly....so I don't know.

[ashbury]

Obviously I'm guessing... But I'm curious on your stance here. I think Beto can appeal to the same people Biden can, but also can appeal to the younger anti establishment movement that Biden will have trouble with.

 

I really like Beto, but the criticism I'm seeing today is it's not clear where he actually is on a lot of policy issues, and many on the left are suggesting he just might be more of the same ala Kerry/Gore/Clinton.

 

I'll start a thread.

So, following this over to the new thread (thanks), Pseudo kind of hit on what I would have said to Smerf. I don't know enough yet about Beto to be opposed to him - I paid little attention to the Texas senate election except the horserace aspects - maybe he managed to avoid pinning himself down on issues, which might (or might not ) explain my ignorance. And I'm not adamantly opposed to Biden, especially in a general election. But I thought that the Harper's article, which I linked to previously, contained too many worrisome instances over the many years, of allowing the Right to stigmatize or harm the more powerless, in the service of bipartisanship. While I recognize that few politicians with a long-time voting record (*cough*Bernie*cough*) would pass muster with the progressive fringe of the party, if Beto's entrance to the presidential field would indicate to Joe that he may as well stay out, that would be very telling for me, and at odds with what I thought Beto would be like.

 

If Joe endorses Beto by calling him "articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," it's really going to be bad.

[Badsmerf]

I think Beto entering the race is a real threat to all, not just Biden. Beto had to be slightly cryptic running statewide in Texas. I hope he'll be more upfront running in the primary, and possibly in the general.

 

I singled out Biden, because he will win with blue color everyday people. Beto poses a real threat to that coalition. Beto has more charisma, is younger, still a white male (fwiw), doesn't have the baggage. This isn't about beating Trump or ideas yet, this is about capturing the base, and I think Beto has the best shot at that.

[TheLeviathan]

He comes out and the first question is "Is he liberal enough" and not "can he win" = why we are likely to get four more years of Trump.

[Mike Sixel]

 

He comes out and the first question is "Is he liberal enough" and not "can he win" = why we are likely to get four more years of Trump.

 

I don't agree with this at all. I think almost everyone here (and online) would agree he can win. But so can a lot of others. We are choosing among those we think can win, by default. Only a tiny percent of people are going to back some random super liberal that can't win.

[ashbury]

He comes out and the first question is "Is he liberal enough"

If mine was among the responses lumped into "first question", I think I'm really asking "what does he stand for?", but it was framed in terms of a speculation offered that Biden might not jump in now that Beto has. Of course there will be some with specific litmus tests, but most of us are still in window-shopping mode at the moment.

[Badsmerf]

Only a tiny percent of people are going to back some random super liberal that can't win.

Ever heard of Bernie bros?

[Mike Sixel]

 

Ever heard of Bernie bros?

 

Are you sure he can't win? I'm not. And, its a demeaning term applied to a huge swath of men and women who believe in him. Indeed, I think he might have won had he been the nominee, but maybe not.

 

Are you sure Beto can? Or Klobuchar? Are you sure of anyone beating Trump, given the last election and how many will vote for him no matter what?

[TheLeviathan]

If mine was among the responses lumped into "first question", I think I'm really asking "what does he stand for?", but it was framed in terms of a speculation offered that Biden might not jump in now that Beto has. Of course there will be some with specific litmus tests, but most of us are still in window-shopping mode at the moment.

Meant nationally, not here on the forum.

 

I share your question which seems based in curiosity. Nationally I feel that question is something of a trap.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't agree with this at all. I think almost everyone here (and online) would agree he can win. But so can a lot of others. We are choosing among those we think can win, by default. Only a tiny percent of people are going to back some random super liberal that can't win.

I think many of our recent discussions have shown a taste of a loud, large number of people who care more about pushing left over winning. Or at least have their priorities lined up that way.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I think many of our recent discussions have shown a taste of a loud, large number of people who care more about pushing left over winning. Or at least have their priorities lined up that way.

 

I wan't to push left, but not at the expense of winning. I don't know what everyone else wants, I won't speak for their motives.....If Beto wants my vote, earn it by more than being "not Trump". 

[PseudoSABR]

 

He comes out and the first question is "Is he liberal enough" and not "can he win" = why we are likely to get four more years of Trump.

My question is does he endorse the policies that not only do I want, but also will help him win the White House.

 

And I think we have a disagreement about how to 'win' the presidency. 

 

And years of moderate Dems being the candidate, and often a losing one, it's fair to ask if he's more of the same old establishment Dems...

[TheLeviathan]

 

My question is does he endorse the policies that not only do I want, but also will help him win the White House.

 

And I think we have a disagreement about how to 'win' the presidency. 

 

And years of moderate Dems being the candidate, and often a losing one, it's fair to ask if he's more of the same old establishment Dems...

 

It's important how we explore that then.  I'd like to move the general conversation further left, but I'd rather leave the meat of policy moving for AFTER we win.  I'm all about Republican losses - the fact that every new candidate gets a public leftist purity test really, really bugs me.  And it works against Republicans losing, it does their work for them.

[Mike Sixel]

 

It's important how we explore that then.  I'd like to move the general conversation further left, but I'd rather leave the meat of policy moving for AFTER we win.  I'm all about Republican losses - the fact that every new candidate gets a public leftist purity test really, really bugs me.  And it works against Republicans losing, it does their work for them.

 

Other than stopping stupid things this administration did from happening earlier, and some improvement in health insurance, what did Obama get us, exactly? Indeed, he may have gotten us Trump, as a reaction to him by certain parts of the electorate. If all we get is Obama lite, I'm not sure we've gotten much in terms of progress, just stopped a few things we don't like.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Other than stopping stupid things this administration did from happening earlier, and some improvement in health insurance, what did Obama get us, exactly? Indeed, he may have gotten us Trump, as a reaction to him by certain parts of the electorate. If all we get is Obama lite, I'm not sure we've gotten much in terms of progress, just stopped a few things we don't like.

 

Um....he basically oversaw the saving of the economy?

 

You may want to start with not expecting any democrat, regardless of their policies, of being able to ride in on their white horse and doing more than Obama.  That's an unfair expectation of any of them and of Obama.

[biggentleben]

 

Um....he basically oversaw the saving of the economy?

 

You may want to start with not expecting any democrat, regardless of their policies, of being able to ride in on their white horse and doing more than Obama.  That's an unfair expectation of any of them and of Obama.

 

Obama also had two years of 8 with a majority working with him to execute policy, and once he didn't have both houses, the opposition was so vitriolic against him that they would almost literally oppose anything he came out in support of...

[Mike Sixel]

 

Um....he basically oversaw the saving of the economy?

 

You may want to start with not expecting any democrat, regardless of their policies, of being able to ride in on their white horse and doing more than Obama.  That's an unfair expectation of any of them and of Obama.

 

If the next democrat does nothing about healthcare, or tax rates (obama cut them, sigh), or student loan debt, or really doing something about the environmental damage we are causing......I liked Obama, but I'm not sure what his presidency accomplished.

 

All we are doing is standing still (which, admittedly, is better than going backward).

[Mike Sixel]

 

Obama also had two years of 8 with a majority working with him to execute policy, and once he didn't have both houses, the opposition was so vitriolic against him that they would almost literally oppose anything he came out in support of...

 

Like I'm trying to say.....just winning the presidency isn't enough. I want a president that can help others get elected, so this doesn't happen again. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

If the next democrat does nothing about healthcare, or tax rates (obama cut them, sigh), or student loan debt, or really doing something about the environmental damage we are causing......I liked Obama, but I'm not sure what his presidency accomplished.

 

All we are doing is standing still (which, admittedly, is better than going backward).

 

He had to spend a significant amount of political capital saving the economy.  He isn't perfect, but he saw us through what could've been a calamity, got the economy humming, and still got something done on healthcare.  That's A LOT.

[Mike Sixel]

 

He had to spend a significant amount of political capital saving the economy.  He isn't perfect, but he saw us through what could've been a calamity, got the economy humming, and still got something done on healthcare.  That's A LOT.

 

Is it saved? Income disparity is worse than ever. New jobs being created pay much less than the jobs we lost. I'm not sure this economy is sustainable, frankly. Not in a way people want anyway.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Is it saved? Income disparity is worse than ever. New jobs being created pay much less than the jobs we lost. I'm not sure this economy is sustainable, frankly. Not in a way people want anyway.

 

I think all of these problems sound better than what looked like it would happen during his term.

[Mike Sixel]

In any event, I want a President that gets things done. Moves us forward. Brings his power to helping more liberals get elected all over the nation. Maybe that's a pipe dream......

 

Oh, and that can convince older liberal SCOTUS members o resign early in his term, so he can replace them. Sigh. 

[Badsmerf]

In any event, I want a President that gets things done. Moves us forward. Brings his power to helping more liberals get elected all over the nation. Maybe that's a pipe dream......

 

Oh, and that can convince older liberal SCOTUS members o resign early in his term, so he can replace them. Sigh.

I'm not as tied to electing liberals as I am against electing Trumpy republicans. I'm curious how partisan the next scotus nomination will be if done by a Democrat.... Will they be rejected by the Mitch McConnell led Senate?

[PseudoSABR]

 

It's important how we explore that then.  I'd like to move the general conversation further left, but I'd rather leave the meat of policy moving for AFTER we win.  I'm all about Republican losses - the fact that every new candidate gets a public leftist purity test really, really bugs me.  And it works against Republicans losing, it does their work for them.

But that (worry about liberal bonafides) was always going to happen.  It's just twitter-verse that brings it to the forefront, now that liberal isn't a dirty word. 

 

I think this goes on the right, but with far, far more inflammatory, hard-line rhetoric. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

But that (worry about liberal bonafides) was always going to happen.  It's just twitter-verse that brings it to the forefront, now that liberal isn't a dirty word. 

 

I think this goes on the right, but with far, far more inflammatory, hard-line rhetoric. 

 

It absolutely does.  In fact, that toxin I think was brought up by right wing radio and infected Republicans.  

 

I'd rather the same not happen to the other party too.

[PseudoSABR]

 

It absolutely does.  In fact, that toxin I think was brought up by right wing radio and infected Republicans.  

 

I'd rather the same not happen to the other party too.

I don't think it will.  The most extreme voices just rise to the top in world of social media, where everything gets retweeted/shared.  I think all the 2020 candidates will eventually have the support of even the Bernie Bros.  I know more moderates who didn't vote for Clinton (or Trump) b/c of their personal dislike, than I do liberals, but that's just anecdotal. 

[PseudoSABR]

[ashbury]

Trump is making fun of Beto's hand gestures. Your move, Beto. Tick tock.

[Vanimal46]

Beto is turning into a cult hero in Texas for sure. And now he's building his #brand across the country. He's got the charisma and personality to win over some swing voters.

 

I would think he'd benefit greatly from a 'proven closer' political veteran on his side like Biden.

 

I would take Beto 10 times out of 10 over Bernie Bros.