Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee


used2b

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I like Beto a lot and want him to have a future in politics. To that end, he probably needs his next race, whatever it may be, to be one he wins. Another loss might be too much to overcome for his long-term future. And I don't think he can just sit around and wait for the opportunity. His star is rising and momentum is everything.

To me the most realistic race for him to win next, save another house run, is probably president. I'd put his chances of winning at maybe 1/4 (maybe 35% to win the nom and 90% to win the general). Does he have a better than 25% chance to beat Cornyn, or win the governorship? I don't think so, but I'm not saying or asking in a way looking for an argument. Genuinely wondering what people think what possible next race he has the highest chance to win. Can he beat Cornyn or Hot Wheels when he couldn't beat Cruz?

To add - I don't think losing the primary would hurt him at all. So president seems to be a no brainer to me. And I'm pretty sure that Oprah thing will be an announcement.

Guy gets Oprah’s support and it’s off to the races.   He needs to be more concrete on his positions but that shouldn’t be too hard to fix.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

Why has Beto not declared yet? ...

This gets asked about one candidate or another almost every election cycle.  I forget the details, but generally, once a candidate declares, they are bound by rules/laws (like contribution limits) that they do not have to mind while only having an exploratory committee. 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/05/11/exploratory.committees.faq/index.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

I'm sort of arguing that he should aspire to Governor of Texas when Texas gets more purple. If he throws his weight around here and concentrates on this state, I think he can make it happen sooner than otherwise. Being President shouldn't be the prize everyone should aspire to. Some people can affect more positive change and do the most good in their state. Like Jerry Brown. That guy worked his skills for the betterment of California and he was beyond a shadow of a doubt a positive force. California has done well under his stewardship. He may have wanted higher national office when he was younger, but if you look at his life, he affected more positive change for California as governor than he would have as president. 

I know it is crazy for Beto not to throw his hat in the presidential race...if being president is what he wants. I just wish he'd consider looking at the good that he could do here and maybe stay home and fix the shit here. Oh well, it isn't likely and I like him so whatever he decides, I'll likely consider him for being my candidate.

The nation is already purple. He lost a Texas race just last year. Why wait for Texas to turn when he is a national brand already?  And even if he loses a Pres run, it keeps his brand strong enough for a 2022 governor shot. In fact, if he doesnt run for Pres, he will be completely faded away by 2022 and 2018 will be ancient history. He has to do it just to make some 2020 noise and stay in the spotlight, win or lose. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, bernorange said:

This gets asked about one candidate or another almost every election cycle.  I forget the details, but generally, once a candidate declares, they are bound by rules/laws (like contribution limits) that they do not have to mind while only having an exploratory committee. 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/05/11/exploratory.committees.faq/index.html

There is that, and there is also the successful Obama late surge model. Dems can't win with a long term campaign. The Fox/conservative radio attacks on Dem frontrunners insures that long term candidates will be "tired," and voters should "want another Dem/woman/minority/liberal, just not this Dem/woman/minority/liberal."  It has to be a "surprise" run by a candidate who hasn't really seen many attacks beforehand. 

Warren is done with because of those tactics. However, this may be an interesting cycle because AOC is an attack magnet and she draws fire away from actual Presidential candidates.  She may very well protect the field so they can run and win with sustained campaigns. 

Edited by FondrenRoad
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2019 at 5:42 PM, Bama Chick said:

 

 


He may be too “centrist” for some and too green for others, but no one can deny he’s charismatic and inspiring. Dude’s a rock star.

 

 

Right now:

My brain says Biden/Beto for the best chance at a win.

My gut says Warren/Beto to reflect my core values as a human being.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I'm not sure two white men are ever going to be the Democratic ticket ever again.

We'll see.

I get your point, but I think "Uncle Joe" might be the exception for this singular circumstance due to his being able to call back on Obama administration nostalgia and his overall broad popularity with blue-collar, baby-boomer whites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Listen to this adult speaking in complete sentences.

Nice clip.

This isn't meant as a criticism of you or her, but how low have we fallen that a coherent message spoken in complete sentences which express full thoughts is the bar that's set for "presidential?"

It's fucking pathetic.

Edit:

I am concerned about some of the reports regarding her behavior as a prosecutor. Bottom line though: I would have no problem whatsoever in voting for Harris over Trump or any other Republican.

"The perfect is not be the enemy of the good."

Edited by bolverk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Warren is done with because of those tactics. However, this may be an interesting cycle because AOC is an attack magnet and she draws fire away from actual Presidential candidates.  She may very well protect the field so they can run and win with sustained campaigns. 

You may be right about drawing fire away from the candidates.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Yeah, obviously Kamala sounds exactly the amount smarter than Trump that she is.  But she's way stronger than Gillibrand (who sounds like she's running for president of student council) and more natural than Warren.

Is this like American Idol or something? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2019 at 12:02 PM, Jhawk said:

I did not know that about her status in the party.  She's young, attractive, military service, etc.  If you're looking for energy, she is a reasonable face of the party that isn't off the rails to the left or too centrist (I would think).  She would smoke any repub in love for the military so that takes away a talking point.  She's a young woman so the dems can continue to harp on "old white men".  If the party would put time and money into her PR then she would be a slam dunk I thought.  As a conservative, she would be someone I would NOT fear in ruining the country so I would see over the top attack ads as blasphemy and out of touch.  Which would turn me off to a republican candidate and maybe get me to stay home.  However if someone like Clinton or AOC or Warren were running then I would absolutely see attack ads as true and it would get me up to go to the polls.  A candidate like Tulsi could lull the opposition to sleep I guess is what I'm saying.

 

Lol were you in a coma for the entirety of the 2004 election? The right wing propaganda machine made a decorated Vietnam vet out to be an anti-military pussy while a guy who had his daddy get him into the champagne unit at the national guard was apparently the second coming of Patton. There will never be any way to "take away" a right wing talking point because they are completely unmoored from any semblance of reality. The Dems could nominate the most milquetoast bloodless inoffensive centrist and Republicans would screech that (s)he is the next coming of Mao. Its laughable that people actually think the Dems could ever do anything to blunt attacks from the right

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

 

Lol were you in a coma for the entirety of the 2004 election? The right wing propaganda machine made a decorated Vietnam vet out to be an anti-military pussy while a guy who had his daddy get him into the champagne unit at the national guard was apparently the second coming of Patton. There will never be any way to "take away" a right wing talking point because they are completely unmoored from any semblance of reality. The Dems could nominate the most milquetoast bloodless inoffensive centrist and Republicans would screech that (s)he is the next coming of Mao. Its laughable that people actually think the Dems could ever do anything to blunt attacks from the right

To be fair, Kerry did serve his country.  But he also shouted down his service to his country and to troops that were still serving.  Then he went on to suppotr wars in his political career that were just as dumb as the war he was in.  That is never a good look regardless of your politics.  It wasn't a good look when McCain was hobnobbing with ISIS and Al Qaeda guys either and he should have been appropriately trashed for it.  I certainly trashed him for it and no one I know has any respect for that piece of shit because of that.

Edited by Jhawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LInk to Buttigieg's interview with Chris Hayes

While I'm most impressed by how thoughtful and intelligent he is, it's nice to see he can talk a little shit as well. 

"At the end of the day, I have more years of government experience than the President of the United States, I have more executive experience than the Vice President, and I have more military experience than the two of them put together."

P.S. Why is Hayes acting like such a dick in this interview? 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...