Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13340

Posted
Posted

NYTimes fear-mongering about how 2020 presidential hopefuls should focus on taking back the Senate...

-----------------------------------------------------
White House Ambitions Cloud Democratic Hopes to Win the Senate

Party leaders, guided by Senator Chuck Schumer and Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, the committee chairwoman, believe they need to nail down Mr. Bullock, and top recruits like him, if they have any chance of riding an anti-Trump wave to Senate control. But it hasn’t been easy.

The Democratic Party’s bench is shallow in states that have been dominated by Republicans, like Georgia, Montana, North Carolina and Texas. It is rare for the party to have first-class candidates in such states, let alone talents like Ms. Abrams, Mr. Bullock and Mr. O’Rourke. And getting them to stay at home has proved nearly impossible.
-----------------------------------------------------
 

Classic Defeatist Dem thinking. Build the bench. Look for exciting young candidates.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3160

Posted
Posted
On 3/1/2019 at 5:02 PM, bad_teammate said:

Just... what? Who? What?

After you listen to substantive, clear-minded, clear-eyed people like Warren and Buttigieg and this shit just feels depressing. It's like she has none of her own thoughts or beliefs and is just filtering through policies like a whale's baleen filtering krill.

I don't find that clip or her candidacy depressing simply bc she's not really looking like a threat right now in the polls. I find it extremely depressing a centrist blah candidate like Biden is gaining so much traction. I swear this country has lost its courage to be bold if someone like him is leading in so many polls.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85910

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bruh Man said:

I don't find that clip or her candidacy depressing simply bc she's not really looking like a threat right now in the polls. I find it extremely depressing a centrist blah candidate like Biden is gaining so much traction. I swear this country has lost its courage to be bold if someone like him is leading in so many polls.

Biden is pure nostalgia and name recognition at this point.  He's not in and his record isn't being combed over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85910

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Holder out.

 

Actually, respekt for him focusing on something that's just as, if not more, important than the Presidency - redistricting for the upcoming decade.  2010 fucking destroyed the Democrats at the state level the entire 20-teens. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 21156

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Biden is going to run but I don’t expect him to enter until sometime around May.  

He doesn’t help himself by entering now.  He doesn’t need to build a movement or desperately fundraise.  But he absolutely has to be on that first debate stage in June.  

Agreed. Specifically to show how out of touch he is and that we need something completely different. It will be obvious to everyone after one debate. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3160

Posted
Posted

There was a story in the NYT a few days ago about Schumer having a hard time getting some of these top names to run for Senate so the Dems can take it back. Hickenlooper was mentioned as someone who would be a favorite if he ran for senate in Colorado. Stein in NC, Abrams in GA, Beto in Texas, Bullock in Montana could setup two Dem senators in that state. Unfortunately none of them are budging right now. Schumer kinda sucks at his job(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85910

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Bruh Man said:

There was a story in the NYT a few days ago about Schumer having a hard time getting some of these top names to run for Senate so the Dems can take it back. Hickenlooper was mentioned as someone who would be a favorite if he ran for senate in Colorado. Stein in NC, Abrams in GA, Beto in Texas, Bullock in Montana could setup two Dem senators in that state. Unfortunately none of them are budging right now. Schumer kinda sucks at his job(s).

I feel a lot of them are using this to get money/recognition.  

Abrams looks like it's between Senate '20 or Governor '22.  I don't think she's jumping into the presidential race.

Bullock would win that race going away.  Hickenlooper said he doesn't want to be Senator; the primary looks pretty competitive and there's some good talent there.  Hard to see Gardner as anything but an underdog.  Colorado is BLUE.  

CO -> AZ -> Maine -> NC -> IA -> GA/Texas.  In that order. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bruh Man

Bruh Man 3160

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I feel a lot of them are using this to get money/recognition.  

Abrams looks like it's between Senate '20 or Governor '22.  I don't think she's jumping into the presidential race.

Bullock would win that race going away.  Hickenlooper said he doesn't want to be Senator; the primary looks pretty competitive and there's some good talent there.  Hard to see Gardner as anything but an underdog.  Colorado is BLUE.  

CO -> AZ -> Maine -> NC -> IA -> GA/Texas.  In that order. 

I don't trust Maine. That witch is still popular there. Dems will need to get a candidate with strong local ties to beat her. Abrams would be a good VP pick for Bernie. He's already committed to picking a woman VP and she helps him with AA's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

I like that some of them are taking a stand against "hot-button" campaign issues like PAC's and billionaires.  But none of them are forsaking compulsory union donations nor trade-group lobby money.  And what's more, none of them really give fuck one (YET) about the real 800 pound gorilla---Super Delegates.  You can take the high road, as I appreciate certain candidates doing, but in the end...the party's handlers will chose its candidate for them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13340

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I like that some of them are taking a stand against "hot-button" campaign issues like PAC's and billionaires.  But none of them are forsaking compulsory union donations nor trade-group lobby money.  And what's more, none of them really give fuck one (YET) about the real 800 pound gorilla---Super Delegates.  You can take the high road, as I appreciate certain candidates doing, but in the end...the party's handlers will chose its candidate for them.  

Tell me everything you know about how the superdelegate system works in the 2020 Dem primary.

Also, unions are awesome and we need far more of them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

the fact that no one knows how the superdelegate system will work in 12 mos time, when they will be engaged and deployed---should give you great pause.  

Unions are not awesome.  They are functional and necessary in many situations.  And an impediment and bully in many others.  To think a "Union" is a monolithic great societal asset that "we need far more of" is obtuse and borderline dangerous.  

I'm happy to step away from the thread if you can tell us (and in my case, those of us already actively supporting Sec. Castro), how the delegate system at the DNC has been improved and made more equitable for 2020.  Since you know, you'll be happy to tell us how we can all rest assured.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85910

Posted
Posted (edited)

The supers don't come into play unless no one gets a majority (past the 50%+1 threshold) on the first ballot.  They are free to continue to endorse whomever they feel is the best candidate.  But they can't swing the nomination on the first ballot.  

End of topic.

Educate yourself.  Don't ask other people to do it for you.

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13340

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Lobo said:

the fact that no one knows how the superdelegate system will work in 12 mos time, when they will be engaged and deployed---should give you great pause.  

No one? Some of us know. It was actually kind of a huge deal.

They don't really matter anymore. They do not vote at all in the first round of delegate ballots and can only vote if there is either an assured winner (i.e., the Round 1 winner has enough real delegates to overcome any superdelegate deficit) or if there's a deadlock (which there has not been in a long time and won't be anytime soon).

Quote

Unions are not awesome.  They are functional and necessary in many situations.  And an impediment and bully in many others.  To think a "Union" is a monolithic great societal asset that "we need far more of" is obtuse and borderline dangerous.  

We need far more guillotines. With you in 'em.

Quote

I'm happy to step away from the thread if you can tell us (and in my case, those of us already actively supporting Sec. Castro), how the delegate system at the DNC has been improved and made more equitable for 2020.  Since you know, you'll be happy to tell us how we can all rest assured.  

See ya later bro :D

Edited by bad_teammate
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

So they don't put any pressure on any other regular delegates?  Bernie was wrong in that respect?  Got it.  

Okay, I'll stay off this thread.  It's cute you guys think you know what's going on.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13340

Posted
Posted
Just now, Lobo said:

So they don't put any pressure on any other regular delegates?  Bernie was wrong in that respect?  Got it.  

You don't "got" anything, bruv.

In 2018, there was a huge change in the role of superdelegates after the 2016 DNC due to negotiations between the shitlibs and Sanders jihadists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 684

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Lobo said:

I like that some of them are taking a stand against "hot-button" campaign issues like PAC's and billionaires.  But none of them are forsaking compulsory union donations nor trade-group lobby money.  And what's more, none of them really give fuck one (YET) about the real 800 pound gorilla---Super Delegates.  You can take the high road, as I appreciate certain candidates doing, but in the end...the party's handlers will chose its candidate for them.  

there is some truth to your position but it's buried under conspiracy theory nutjob innuendos.  also, just curious, are you willing to acknowledge that this paragraph applies equally to the gop?  cruz was forced by the party to concede to trump and give up his delegates.  the party supports the frontrunner.  period.  so to say "the party's handlers will choose its candidate for them" is disingenuous. the people choose the candidate and the party throws all it's weight behind the frontrunner.   bernie never had a chance in hell, hillary is more mainstream, and the party did what was best for the party.  same as the gop did with trump.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85910

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, thrillhammer said:

there is some truth to your position but it's buried under conspiracy theory nutjob innuendos.  also, just curious, are you willing to acknowledge that this paragraph applies equally to the gop?  cruz was forced by the party to concede to trump and give up his delegates.  the party supports the frontrunner.  period.  so to say "the party's handlers will choose its candidate for them" is disingenuous. the people choose the candidate and the party throws all it's weight behind the frontrunner.   bernie never had a chance in hell, hillary is more mainstream, and the party did what was best for the party.  same as the gop did with trump.  

Hillary was short ~163 delegates from clinching on the first ballot. 

So the super delegates should have just completely disregarded Hillary had nearly enough to clinch with pledged delegates and just overruled them all?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thrillhammer

thrillhammer 684

Posted
Posted
33 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Hillary was short ~163 delegates from clinching on the first ballot. 

So the super delegates should have just completely disregarded Hillary had nearly enough to clinch with pledged delegates and just overruled them all?  

 i dont see the controversy.  both parties have super delegates.  under both bylaws the super delegate is unbound and can vote for whoever they want.  it's really a moot point.  bernie was never going to be the nominee.  everybody knew a year before when he declared, and they know it today.  bernie is a great guy, and a fantastic speaker, capable of firing up the base akin to the trumpster, but he will never be the nominee.  if he was serious about being the nominee he would register as a democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19138

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

The same poll found that 41 percent of respondents would vote to re-elect Trump to office in 2020. The research was conducted while a slew of Democratic candidates announced they would seek to unseat the president from office setting in motion the year-long sprint to the first primaries of the 2020 election cycle.

The Trump administration has sought to display the 2020 presidential election as a referendum on socialist policies.

This is a recipe for a Democratic landslide, no matter who runs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19138

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Right now that's against "generic Democrat". I fear what that number will do when there's a tangible boogey man or woman and the GOP bullshit machine starts attacking. That number gives me no confidence.

As opposed to a tangible Donald Trump with a failed presidency under his belt?

I hope the Democratic machine can work with that.

Edited by David Dennison
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85910

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

This is a recipe for a Democratic landslide, no matter who runs.

Obama's numbers in May 2011 were 53/43 in favor of re-election. 

53%

Compared to 41% for Trump in March 2019....

41%.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted
As opposed to a tangible Donald Trump with a failed presidency under his belt?
I hope the Democratic machine can work with that.
I have a hard time believing that anyone who doesn't already hate Trump is going to suddenly start now, barring recession. He's a known quantity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13340

Posted
Posted

If you want the good guys to win in 2020 (and this is truly a good guys vs bad guys election), then learning your local voting registration/participation laws and locations will be vital. If we turn out the vote, we win. If we do not turn out the vote, we lose.

The people are with us.

DDGJJkiWsAArq-5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...