2020 Presidential Election

[TheLeviathan]

 

Honestly, I think Beto is a crap candidate because he's all flash.

 

If we're going with "electable and moderate", give me Klobuchar all day. At least the woman has both experience and the ability to actually, god forbid, accomplish something.

 

And I'm not even really a Klobuchar supporter (I like her quite a bit where she is).

 

He certainly hasn't started well.  His performance against Cruz has me interested enough to at least give him some rope.  Right now I think Klobuchar is the best candidate to win, but I tend to think Biden is the clear guy if he enters.

 

The Dems have 7 or so states they need to concentrate on - Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona.  

 

If they even flip PA and Ohio it's over and they win.  Several other combos get it done too.  It's not a huge mountain to climb.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

He certainly hasn't started well.  His performance against Cruz has me interested enough to at least give him some rope.  Right now I think Klobuchar is the best candidate to win, but I tend to think Biden is the clear guy if he enters.

 

The Dems have 7 or so states they need to concentrate on - Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona.  

 

If they even flip PA and Ohio it's over and they win.  Several other combos get it done too.  It's not a huge mountain to climb.

I agree that Biden is likely the early favorite if he runs but it makes me nauseous. He's the last thing the party needs right now. Sanders may be old and white but at least he's progressive. Beto may be centrist and white but at least he's young and interesting. Biden is an old, white, corporate, establishment Democrat and I sure as hell hope he doesn't win.

 

And you're right that the Dem path to victory is pretty easy, provided they don't find Hillary Clinton, redux.

 

And right now, I don't know who that person is but we have plenty of time to figure that out before the primaries.

[PseudoSABR]

 

He certainly hasn't started well.  His performance against Cruz has me interested enough to at least give him some rope.  Right now I think Klobuchar is the best candidate to win, but I tend to think Biden is the clear guy if he enters.

Klobuchar will not increase turnout esp. if she doesn't support a progressive agenda.  I think she'll suffer from the same lack of enthusiasm as Hillary.  Maybe a moderate like Beto could win, like Obama, his personality could overcome his more-of-the-same policy, but I just think Klobuchar while competent doesn't inspire much.

 

And like Harris, she's a former prosecutor, which is a huge strike in my book.  I'd vote for her in the general, but I'd be holding my nose ala Hillary. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Klobuchar will not increase turnout esp. if she doesn't support a progressive agenda.  I think she'll suffer from the same lack of enthusiasm as Hillary.  Maybe a moderate like Beto could win, like Obama, his personality could overcome his more-of-the-same policy, but I just think Klobuchar while competent doesn't inspire much.

 

And like Harris, she's a former prosecutor, which is a huge strike in my book.  I'd vote for her in the general, but I'd be holding my nose ala Hillary. 

What befuddles me about Klobuchar is how she's considered one of the funniest people in Washington, how beloved she is at insider parties, and how little that translates to pretty much... everything... we see.

 

But I disagree that Klobuchar doesn't bring anything that Clinton didn't bring. First, Klobuchar can easily stump in places like Iowa, Wisconsin, and Michigan... and win. She has the ability to speak to those people with honesty and experience. She can "farm up" and do it earnestly.

 

And if she plays it hard enough, she can make Trump look like the actual outsider he is to the Midwest. That, in itself, basically guarantees victory in a general.

[PseudoSABR]

 

What befuddles me about Klobuchar is how she's considered one of the funniest people in Washington, how beloved she is at insider parties, and how little that translates to pretty much... everything... we see.

I had no idea she was funny. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I had no idea she was funny. 

Oh, it's pretty widely known she's ****ing hilarious. It simply does not translate to what we see.

 

(also, edited my last post while you responded so please read the rest)

[PseudoSABR]

 

Oh, it's pretty widely known she's ****ing hilarious. It simply does not translate to what we see.

 

(also, edited my last post while you responded so please read the rest)

She does have greater appeal to Bluedog Dems, but I'm not so sure those exist anymore, especially if she's not tapping into the socialist-like agenda which would substantively help them out.  There was a real reason that I heard from a lot of conservative family members that they actually liked Bernie because he spoke to power; she won't tap into that.   I think she plays well in Midwest Minnesota, but I'm not so sure how she'll play in Ohio, Michigan, and Penn.  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

She does have greater appeal to Bluedog Dems, but I'm not so sure those exist anymore, especially if she's not tapping into the socialist-like agenda which would substantively help them out.  There was a real reason that I heard from a lot of conservative family members that they actually liked Bernie because he spoke to power; she won't tap into that.   I think she plays well in Midwest Minnesota, but I'm not so sure how she'll play in Ohio, Michigan, and Penn.  

And that's very possible, but she's also rather progressive in a lot of ways. I think too many coasters are dragging her down because she plays more to Midwestern sensibilities of "progressive", which has a lot to do with agriculture, conservation, etc.

 

I was recently ripped into because I defended Klobuchar's attempt to remove Minnesota gray wolves from federal protected species list and returning the power to manage gray wolves back to Minnesota. Despite my attempts to explain to him that:

 

1. Minnesota is liberal

2. There are more gray wolves in Minnesota than the rest of the country

3. Other states - with far fewer gray wolves - already have a federal exception that Minnesota doesn't have

4. Minnesota's DNR has proven itself to be a quite capable regulatory agency

5. Minnesotans absolutely care more about their local environment than outsiders, as we are an outdoorsy people who link our personal identities to our environment

 

He protested and called me a butcher, a wolf murderer, and all sorts of other nonsense... even though I wasn't in favor of killing wolves so much as the return of animal management to a state that has proven itself quite capable of doing the job.

 

It was a really good example of why Democrats don't win in the Midwest. I own a cabin on a lake. I care about wolves and the Minnesota environment approximately 10,000x more than this man from the Philadelphia suburbs, a man whose likelihood of seeing a wild gray wolf in his life is approximately 1%.

 

Yet I'm the ******* because I trust the MN DNR to do right more than I trust Washington.

 

And THAT'S what Democrats need to fix. Talk to people who live in the areas you're trying to regulate. Attempt to distribute regulation where it fits.

 

Basically, don't talk down to people. Shockingly, they won't like it much.

[PseudoSABR]

 

And that's very possible, but she's also rather progressive in a lot of ways. I think too many coasters are dragging her down because she plays more to Midwestern sensibilities of "progressive", which has a lot to do with agriculture, conservation, etc.

 

I was recently ripped into because I defended Klobuchar's attempt to remove Minnesota gray wolves from federal protected species list and returning the power to manage gray wolves back to Minnesota. Despite my attempts to explain to him that:

 

1. Minnesota is liberal

2. There are more gray wolves in Minnesota than the rest of the country

3. Other states - with far fewer gray wolves - already have a federal exception that Minnesota doesn't have

4. Minnesota's DNR has proven itself to be a quite capable regulatory agency

5. Minnesotans absolutely care more about their local environment than outsiders, as we are an outdoorsy people who link our personal identities to our environment

 

He protested and called me a butcher, a wolf murderer, and all sorts of other nonsense... even though I wasn't in favor of killing wolves so much as the return of animal management to a state that has proven itself quite capable of doing the job.

 

It was a really good example of why Democrats don't win in the Midwest. I own a cabin on a lake. I care about wolves and the Minnesota environment approximately 10,000x more than this man from the Philadelphia suburbs.

 

Yet I'm the ******* because I trust the MN DNR to do right more than I trust Washington.

 

And THAT'S what Democrats need to fix. Talk to people who live in the areas you're trying to regulate. Attempt to distribute regulation where it fits.

 

Basically, don't talk down to people. Shockingly, they won't like it much.

That dude sounds like schmuck (not seeing the distinction that Minnesota might actually give greater protection to the wolves shows a disinterest in getting things right).  I have family members who are liberal and do this all the time and it drives me nuts (I do think it has to do with decades of being basically shamed from public discourse for being liberal, so I kinda understand).  I think Hillary suffered from this more than any of her other flaws; she was haughty AF.  

 

As you said earlier, Klobuchar seems like a great Senator for Minnesota.  But I do recall reading that she's decided to turn to the center, as a way to distinguish herself in a plethora of candidates.   Should Biden run, as Levi suggested, that strategy heads south, and may already be compromised with Beto's candidacy.  

 

Honestly, I look forward to the debates; I'll be watching for authenticity, ability to inspire enthusiasm, and actual substance on policy.   Interestingly, the latter is both a strike for Beto and Bernie.  That Bernie has had two years to get viable policies in order, yet he hasn't announced anything is troubling (though he did co-sponsor, and seemingly largely lead, the Senate vote on Yemen, helping his foreign policy bonafides).  

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

That dude sounds like schmuck (not seeing the distinction that Minnesota might actually give greater protection to the wolves shows a disinterest in getting things right).  I have family members who are liberal and do this all the time and it drives me nuts (I do think it has to do with decades of being basically shamed from public discourse for being liberal, so I kinda understand).  I think Hillary suffered from this more than any of her other flaws; she was haughty AF.  

 

As you said earlier, Klobuchar seems like a great Senator for Minnesota.  But I do recall reading that she's decided to turn to the center, as a way to distinguish herself in a plethora of candidates.   Should Biden run, as Levi suggested, that strategy heads south, and may already be compromised with Beto's candidacy.  

 

Honestly, I look forward to the debates; I'll be watching for authenticity, ability to inspire enthusiasm, and actual substance on policy.   Interestingly, the latter is both a strike for Beto and Bernie.  That Bernie has had two years to get viable policies in order, yet he hasn't announced anything is troubling (though he did co-sponsor, and seemingly largely lead, the Senate vote on Yemen, helping his foreign policy bonafides).  

Authenticity will mean a lot but I think Klobuchar has too small a chance to win because she's an easy target for crap like mining, tempered conservation, and moderate agriculture reform.

 

But that's the problem. She's actually talking to the people the Democrats need to win because she's not pandering to the ridiculous demands that the Democrats already have.

 

I lived in SoCal after living in rural Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Utah for years growing up.

 

The average coastal city dweller has about as many realistic expectations of rural America as a walrus does about French politics.

 

They don't understand the situation at all, they don't care to learn about it, yet they want to impose their will ferociously and without hesitation.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Klobuchar will not increase turnout esp. if she doesn't support a progressive agenda.  

 

 I know you're hung up on turnout, but I think you're focused on the wrong thing.

 

The Dems don't need more voters overall.  They could turnout millions more and still lose.  It's where they turnout and who (especially those Obama/Trump voters) they turn out to vote for.  Being more progressive may accomplish that, but it's far from a given.

[TheLeviathan]

 

 

The average coastal city dweller has about as many realistic expectations of rural America as a walrus does about French politics.

 

That's simply ridiculous.  The Walrus is WAY ahead on that comparison.

[PseudoSABR]

 

 I know you're hung up on turnout, but I think you're focused on the wrong thing.

 

The Dems don't need more voters overall.  They could turnout millions more and still lose.  It's where they turnout and who (especially those Obama/Trump voters) they turn out to vote for.  Being more progressive may accomplish that, but it's far from a given.

I'm hung up turnout, but really I'm hung up on the candidate having a cohesive message that isn't the calculated data point that I feel Dems have gone with lately.  I don't necessarily think that a progressive agenda leads to authenticity; you have Beto and Biden as counterpoint to that.  And you're right, that because of the electoral college, the candidate needs to turnout in swing states not in Cali or NY.  But I think because of social media, the youth is rather homogeneous, and that what will turn them out in Cali will turn them out in the rust belt.  

[TheLeviathan]

Perhaps you're right.  I'm not comfortable relying on the youth vote.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Perhaps you're right.  I'm not comfortable relying on the youth vote.

For sure. But they are a classic undervote that the Dems can capitalize upon.  And you're right, it's foolish to rely on that turnout.

[Musk21]

 

Honestly, I think Beto is a crap candidate because he's all flash.

 

If we're going with "electable and moderate", give me Klobuchar all day. At least the woman has both experience and the ability to actually, god forbid, accomplish something.

 

And I'm not even really a Klobuchar supporter (I like her quite a bit where she is).

 

At this point, I don't care if someone is all flash or moderate or whether they are "liberal enough." I just want someone who will ensure that we vote Trump/Pence out of office. Let's be honest....As long as Mitch McConnell and the Republicans control the Senate, nothing much is going to get accomplished anyway. It happened to Obama and the same thing is going to happen to whomever is the next Dem elected President.

 

Sadly, the Dems do need to make sure to nominate someone that inspires people to vote. Obviously Hillary didn't do that. If that person is Beto or Biden, then so be it. Need to coalesce around that person. But they cannot get mired in the weeds talking about crap that is going to turn off potential voters or mobilize the other side.

 

Why are they talking about expanding the SCOTUS or abolishing the Electoral College or whether someone is liberal or progressive enough? Just get elected first...

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

Why are they talking about expanding the SCOTUS or abolishing the Electoral College or whether someone is liberal or progressive enough? Just get elected first...

Well, even though those questions invite controversy, they really are about turnout; it's not only the person that will turn out people, but the policies they rally behind.  Trial balloons this early, I don't think are damaging.  And, I'll keep emphasizing that Hillary's main attribute was supposedly electability, so I think "playing it safe" for the general election is a big mistake.  Being bold on policy will turn people out.  I don't think there's many fence sitters who will suddenly vote for Trump because of a stance on the electoral college. 

 

(And if turnout is large enough, the Senate IS in play; I think it's defeatist to already capitulate to a McConnell led senate).

[NumberThree]

 

 

 

Sadly, the Dems do need to make sure to nominate someone that inspires people to vote. Obviously Hillary didn't do that. If that person is Beto or Biden, then so be it. Need to coalesce around that person. But they cannot get mired in the weeds talking about crap that is going to turn off potential voters or mobilize the other side.

 

Didn't Hillary get the most votes any Democrat has every gotten in the last presidential election, and won the popular vote by 3 million? It wasn't about getting the vote out ... it was getting it out in the 'right' locations.

[Musk21]

 

Well, even though those questions invite controversy, they really are about turnout; it's not only the person that will turn out people, but the policies they rally behind.  Trial balloons this early, I don't think are damaging.  And, I'll keep emphasizing that Hillary's main attribute was supposedly electability, so I think "playing it safe" for the general election is a big mistake.  Being bold on policy will turn people out.  I don't think there's many fence sitters who will suddenly vote for Trump because of a stance on the electoral college. 

 

(And if turnout is large enough, the Senate IS in play; I think it's defeatist to already capitulate to a McConnell led senate).

 

I don't think Hillary's main attribute was "electability." We were told she was the most qualified person even to run. That it was "her turn." Conveniently forgetting how polarizing, fair or unfair, she was.

 

As for the Senate, it's going to be hard to flip 4 seats...Not to mention having to hold AL, NH, VA, and even MN.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/politics/2020-senate/?utm_term=.4d15cd55a740

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Didn't Hillary get the most votes any Democrat has every gotten in the last presidential election, and won the popular vote by 3 million? It wasn't about getting the vote out ... it was getting it out in the 'right' locations.

 

That was my concern.  Making turnout your primary goal misses the lessons to be learned from 2016.

 

Hillary lost by less than 2% in enough states to win the Presidency.  A number of voters in those states were past Obama voters who turned Trump.

 

I could care less about turnout....let's flip those people back!  As Musk said - sew up the Presidency and then aggressively push progressive agenda items.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I could care less about turnout....let's flip those people back!  As Musk said - sew up the Presidency and then aggressively push progressive agenda items.

I think Trump relied on turnout, rather than flipping Obama voters. 

 

If you turnout young people in middle America, it will benefit the Democrats.  Trying to flip bluedogs will make young people stay home.  But we're just talking in circles at this point.

[PseudoSABR]

What do you all think of this rumor Biden will announce his VP is Stacey Abrams right out the gate?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

What do you all think of this rumor Biden will announce his VP is Stacey Abrams right out the gate?

I think Biden can go **** himself and it's an obvious, cheap play.

 

Can you say "token"? It covers his moderate nature and makes him seem far more progressive than he is. It's a lame political play.

 

Now, there's one exception... If Biden declares himself a one term president at the same time, I'll listen.

[TheLeviathan]

No one has to love Biden.  Just love Not-Trump.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Now, there's one exception... If Biden declares himself a one term president at the same time, I'll listen.

I understand that's part of the deal. 

 

But I largely agree.  This feels like the same kind of calculated move that makes Democrats the elite, out-of-touch, inauthentic party that common people don't vote for.

 

I do like Abrams quite a bit though.

[Badsmerf]

I keep saying it, but Biden is the establishment. He is no different than Clinton in that regard. His time is over.

 

I lie Abrams too, but this isn't about her. I don't think she should say yes to him. She'll be high on the list for whoever wins the primary.

[PseudoSABR]

Is James Comey Running for President . . . or Savagely Pranking Us?

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

When does Biden enter the race!

[howeda7]

I think the "creepy Joe" stuff will keep Biden out. Frankly, he's already run twice and lost and he'll be 80 in office and he has a lot of skeletons, even if they're minor compared to Trump. There are better options. At the moment, my preference is Amy or Pete. But really anyone but Bernie will do.

[Badsmerf]

Biden will not make out of the primary. No way. The polls are wrong. Way better options. Democrats are much better off with Pete, Harris, Klobs', Beto, Warren. I'm very much against regurgitated candidates that didn't win.