2020 Presidential Election

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Funded by Madame Tussaud dark money, no doubt.

That’s the ketchup lady he married, right?

[Badsmerf]

That’s the ketchup lady he married, right?

Yes.

[PseudoSABR]

 

How the **** did Gore and Kerry win the primaries? Honestly...

Who were the other choices? Howard Dean? Jerry Brown? I don't even remember. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

I agree but I don’t think electability is as much of a concern as it’s played up to be. The Dems have lost three times this century. The candidates were:

2000 - the most boring man on the planet

2004 - somehow, an even more boring man, this time one that resembled something rescued from a wax mannequin museum fire ten minutes too late

2016 - switch it up! a boring woman who gets bonus points for being despised by 50% of the country

It seems maybe electability isn’t the biggest problem here.

 

I agree, but there is a potential flaw in the conclusion being drawn.  Simply because these candidates were seen as electable, and share that in common, does not make that a common cause of defeat.

 

For example, it's quite possible if the Dems had nominated the less electable option in 2008 (see: Hillary Clinton), John McCain might have served several terms in office.  

 

At the end of the day you sorta need that person to be electable or why would you nominate them?  Where I agree with the criticism is that it can't be is seen as a sufficient quality in that candidate.  They have to be both electable and have minimal negative qualities and other positive qualities.  Clinton was electable and had positive qualities, but she had a tractor trailer worth of negatives.  Kerry was electable, but brought absolutely nothing else to the table.  Ditto Gore.

 

If Biden offers nothing more than electable - yeah, ditch him.  But don't ditch him in favor of someone that gives you warm fuzzies ideologically but couldn't be elected if their life depended on it.

[PseudoSABR]

I think it's only after the fact that we can say Obama was "electable." There was plenty of risk with him, his inexperience, his race, his name, etc.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If Biden offers nothing more than electable - yeah, ditch him.  But don't ditch him in favor of someone that gives you warm fuzzies ideologically but couldn't be elected if their life depended on it.

To me, this is the meat of it. I do NOT want to see Biden get the nomination.

 

But, if he does, I'll roll with it because he's the type of smarmy asshat who can win the whole thing.

 

What bothers me the most is how fervently the Democratic Party eats its own. Warren was a Republican, Klobuchar is a centrist, Biden is establishment, Sanders only attracts bros, etc etc etc.

 

Some of that happened with Republicans in 2016 but not nearly to this extent, at least not what I saw.

 

We should all back off a bit and just let this thing play out for a few months.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I think it's only after the fact that we can say Obama was "electable." There was plenty of risk with him, his inexperience, his race, his name, etc.  

 

He squashed much of that risk because he was allowed to breath as a candidate in the primaries.  As Brock alludes, the Dems are already suffocating their own without giving many of them even a shot.

 

I don't see how Warren can win (despite liking her as a candidate), but I'd sure as hell like to give her a shot at galvanizing the electorate.  Same goes for any of these candidates, whatever pros or cons they have.

[gunnarthor]

Gore was the obvious choice in 2000. He was the VP to a very popular president. One of the big mistakes in 2000 and 2016, I think, is that both Gore and HRC failed to use Bill Clinton enough on the campaign trail. For very different reasons, both didn't use him nearly as much as they should have.

 

I can't remember who I supported in the 2004 primaries but I know I helped register voters for Kerry at some point. Did Edwards through his hat in the ring in 04? A big idea in 04 was that the Dems had to nominate someone with a military background b/c of the Iraq war. I think there was a plan to nominate a former general even though he was probably a republican on most issues. Kerry was a rough candidate but he also got blindsided by the Swift Boat ads, which, frankly, turned the election. And the GOP has certainly nominated some pretty boring candidates themselves - Romney, Bush etc.

[biggentleben]

 

I think it's only after the fact that we can say Obama was "electable." There was plenty of risk with him, his inexperience, his race, his name, etc.  

 

Interestingly, though, he was known to a lot of middle America by the time he truly became a candidate. "Dreams from My Father" was included in a modern American literature class I took in college. My mom had "Audacity of Hope" come up in her book club in 2007.

 

That's something that people do forget about Obama...his ideas and persona was out there in print for many to read and interpret before he ever was a Presidential candidate. At this point, any of the current candidates releasing a book would be viewed entirely as a move toward the 2020 election.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Interestingly, though, he was known to a lot of middle America by the time he truly became a candidate. "Dreams from My Father" was included in a modern American literature class I took in college. My mom had "Audacity of Hope" come up in her book club in 2007.

 

That's something that people do forget about Obama...his ideas and persona was out there in print for many to read and interpret before he ever was a Presidential candidate. At this point, any of the current candidates releasing a book would be viewed entirely as a move toward the 2020 election.

People in middle America still read?  I kid.

[Brock Beauchamp]

People in middle America still read? I kid.

But do you really?

[PseudoSABR]

 

But do you really?

Not like I did, too many English degrees spoiled my joy of reading honestly (and my current job is all reading/research and writing).   I do consume lots of short-form reading.  But books are hard for me to pick up much less get through. The more distance I get from all that schooling (and this particular job), I can see getting into it again.  

[PseudoSABR]

Bernie Sanders introduces 'rebuild rural America' proposals

 

Smart.  Glad to see some policy from Bernie.

[biggentleben]

Lots and lots of problems there, but I'd want to consult my dad to get the wording better. Needless to say, way too much left vague for many farmers who have been tagged before by people who simply don't have a clue how farming is done in another part of the country. My own father's operation would be considered incredibly large basically anywhere but the Grain Belt, but significant advances in equipment have allowed him to do that on his own, even after my brothers and I left home and didn't return to the farm.

 

Another major, major piece absent from direct mention by Bernie is livestock.

[PseudoSABR]

“This Is Do-or-Die”: Joe Biden’s “Electability” Argument Is How Democrats Lose Elections

[TheLeviathan]

 

“This Is Do-or-Die”: Joe Biden’s “Electability” Argument Is How Democrats Lose Elections

 

Was there a second part of this article that used something more substantial to make the argument?  Or didn't uncut it's own premise in the final paragraph?

 

If you're going to keep citing these articles, it'd be nice to find one that offered something more in the way of analysis.  These are mostly lazy arguments that look at none of the nuance that goes into election results.  Or the difficulty or predicting future ones.

 

You're celebrating your echo chamber.  Be better than that.

[PseudoSABR]

[Badsmerf]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1125899424201420800

How did they get them? I'm more interested in the past 15 years than that timeframe.

[PseudoSABR]

 

How did they get them? I'm more interested in the past 15 years than that timeframe.

For sure. But at least we know Trump was a loser during his supposed hey-day. (I have no idea how they obtained them. Probably through NY state leaks.)

[gunnarthor]

Seems like Trump is becoming the little dutch boy and trying to plus a lot of leaks with his fingers. Hopefully/Probably can't hold up. 

[one_eyed_jack]

I'm getting increasingly concerned that the Dems are blowing this and we're going to get 4 more years of this noxious clown show.   Obama was right when he warned of the dangers of a circular firing squad.  It feels like every day I read about someone announcing that they are running.  At this rate it will soon be easier to name the Dems in the Senate who aren't running.

 

Forget by who, but I saw the point made recently that the last 2 successful Democratic presidential candidates, both of whom also won re-election bids, were both seen as challenges to the status quo and appealing to more centrist voters.   I thought it was a good observation, but nobody in the current field jumps out at me as fitting that description.  

 

The other important point not to lose sight of is this:  this is not really a national election.  It will come down the results in a small number of battleground states, maybe 5 or 6.   You already know which way the other 40+ are going to go.  Don't worry about those.

 

Sadly, having lost 3 very winnable presidential elections in the last 5, it's hard to have faith that the Dems will get this one right.

 

[Badsmerf]

I think there are a large number of the Dem field that will beat Trump. I like some more than others, but Trump is a terrible incumbent.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm getting increasingly concerned that the Dems are blowing this and we're going to get 4 more years of this noxious clown show. Obama was right when he warned of the dangers of a circular firing squad. It feels like every day I read about someone announcing that they are running. At this rate it will soon be easier to name the Dems in the Senate who aren't running.

 

Forget by who, but I saw the point made recently that the last 2 successful Democratic presidential candidates, both of whom also won re-election bids, were both seen as challenges to the status quo and appealing to more centrist voters. I thought it was a good observation, but nobody in the current field jumps out at me as fitting that description.

 

The other important point not to lose sight of is this: this is not really a national election. It will come down the results in a small number of battleground states, maybe 5 or 6. You already know which way the other 40+ are going to go. Don't worry about those.

 

Sadly, having lost 3 very winnable presidential elections in the last 5, it's hard to have faith that the Dems will get this one right.

Yup. Like five states even matter in this election. It's a problem for liberals for sure.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Yup. Like five states even matter in this election. It's a problem for liberals for sure.

 

That and Republican factions fall into line.  The left has always had more trouble quelling their small uprisings.

 

Trump gets elected - Evangelicals fall in line.  Hillary gets elected - some liberals sit in the corner and pout.  It's a character strength that principles matter so much, but it's an election weakness of the highest order.

[one_eyed_jack]

 

That and Republican factions fall into line.  The left has always had more trouble quelling their small uprisings.

 

Trump gets elected - Evangelicals fall in line.  Hillary gets elected - some liberals sit in the corner and pout.  It's a character strength that principles matter so much, but it's an election weakness of the highest order.

 

Yeah Dems can get hurt in elections because some lefties get overly concerned with their own smug self-satisfaction.  Adherence to principles is a fine thing, but like many other good things, it can become a bad thing when taken too far.

One of the big reasons that Trump won in 2016 is that many disappointed Bernie lovers just couldn't bring themselves to vote for "Crooked Hillary", so they either stayed home or voted for Jill Stein.

 

  

 

[one_eyed_jack]

 

Yup. Like five states even matter in this election. It's a problem for liberals for sure.

 

I think Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia and Florida will decide it.  Trump won all of those but Virginia last time around. If the economy stays strong, it's going to be an uphill battle for the Dems to flip enough of the others to win.

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

Yeah Dems can get hurt in elections because some lefties get overly concerned with their own smug self-satisfaction.  Adherence to principles is a fine thing, but like many other good things, it can become a bad thing when taken too far.

One of the big reasons that Trump won in 2016 is that many disappointed Bernie lovers just couldn't bring themselves to vote for "Crooked Hillary", so they either stayed home or voted for Jill Stein.

We've talked about this before, but anecdotally I know far more moderates that voted for neither Hillary and Trump; I literally know no one who supported Bernie in the primaries and did not vote for Hillary.  These people only seem to exist on twitter...  

 

What this analysis doesn't take into account is that Bernie appealed to people who normally would not vote at all or do not vote for Democrat (Green partiers etc.).  So I'm not really sure there's any lost Democrats because of Bernie, rather he broadened the tent, and it is no surprise that people who were engaged for the first time by him, weren't going to turn out for Hillary.  (Let's not forget the major reason to vote her was that she was electable/qualified as opposed to Bernie).

 

Cynicism isn't leadership.  I'm beginning to think if there's one Democrat that could actually lose to Trump, it might be Biden.  

 

That said, it's nice to have new voice around here.  I hope you keep it up. 

[one_eyed_jack]

 

We've talked about this before, but anecdotally I know far more moderates that voted for neither Hillary and Trump; I literally know no one who supported Bernie in the primaries and did not vote for Hillary.  These people only seem to exist on twitter...  

 

What this analysis doesn't take into account is that Bernie appealed to people who normally would not vote at all or do not vote for Democrat (Green partiers etc.).  So I'm not really sure there's any lost Democrats because of Bernie, rather he broadened the tent, and it is no surprise that people who were engaged for the first time by him, weren't going to turn out for Hillary.  (Let's not forget the major reason to vote her was that she was electable/qualified as opposed to Bernie).

 

Cynicism isn't leadership.  I'm beginning to think if there's one Democrat that could actually lose to Trump, it might be Biden.  

 

That said, it's nice to have new voice around here.  I hope you keep it up. 

 

Anecdotally, I actually know a few traditionally Democratic voters who were all in on Bernie that either stayed home or voted for Stein on election night.  I even know of one Bernie supporter who voted for Trump, though I don't know this person well enough to know if they typically voted Dem or were one of the newer voters you mentioned.

I'm not saying these folks are the only or even the main reason Hillary lost, but I think they were a factor.  

In any case, I don't think Bernie is the answer for 2020, and I suspect you're right that Biden isn't either. 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Yeah Dems can get hurt in elections because some lefties get overly concerned with their own smug self-satisfaction.  Adherence to principles is a fine thing, but like many other good things, it can become a bad thing when taken too far.

One of the big reasons that Trump won in 2016 is that many disappointed Bernie lovers just couldn't bring themselves to vote for "Crooked Hillary", so they either stayed home or voted for Jill Stein.

 

We get regularly examples of your first sentence around here so that made me chuckle.

 

I'm not convinced the scorned Bernie lovers cost the Dems, though.  I don't think dense groups of Bernie lovers in Michigan, Penn, Ohio, and Wisconsin were enough to make up that difference.  2016 was lost because a two decade campaign of anti-Clinton had left so much bitterness in key swing states that Trump could swoop in and lie his way into people's votes.  

 

The Dems will certainly nominate someone with far less baggage personally than Clinton.  But I am still concerned how the word "socialism" plays out.  Eventually it has to be truly tested in a presidential election, I guess I'd just prefer we kick that can down the road four years with an incumbent. 

[biggentleben]

The in-fighting in the Democratic party turned away many from voting Democrat in 2016, whether we want to admit it or not. Trump stirred up plenty of controversy among Republican candidates, but that was resolved so far ahead of the convention that it was out of mind by the time the party announced its candidate. The Democratic convention was a show for all the wrong reasons in 2016, and I do know some legit independent/moderate types who either did not vote for President at all or held their nose and went with Trump.