2020 Democratic Nominee

[Js1 85109]

I saw some tweets where his team made him rewatch his performance in Miami and was like "you're being a massive beta, you passive bitch.  Do something." 

[Red Five 40661]

Oh and Tulsi will try to get a lick in with Harris. 

Now that is something that would get me to watch.

[Red Five 40661]

Oh and Tulsi will try to get a lick in with Harris. 

Now that is something that would get me to watch.

[elfenix 34171]

On 7/16/2019 at 8:30 AM, Js1 said:

Errbody below the top 15, GTFO

 

williamson needs to be in every debate now through the election. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13412]

I hadn't heard this previous story about Cory Booker and his football career at Stanford, especially with Denny Green not letting him play during his 5th year of eligibility:  https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/19/politics/cory-booker-football/index.html   At least Stanford let him keep his scholarship but it sounds like he went onto Oxford with a Rhodes scholarship instead.

[Skyline 325]

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

13 minutes ago, Skyline said:

 

She's really hurt by the bar on foreign donations. 

[BradInATX 9208]

3 hours ago, Js1 said:

I saw some tweets where his team made him rewatch his performance in Miami and was like "you're being a massive beta, you passive bitch.  Do something." 

He'd probably be best served by making his debate 2 schtick to go hard in the paint against Trump. He'll look like a goof if he goes after Harris or Biden or even Pete. He might be able to claw some ground back by just going HAM on the president, though. None of them really focused on Trump in the last debates, it could work a bit. Beto is toast though.

Edited July 19, 2019 by BradInATX

[bad_teammate 13132]

Two good candidates left in the top.

The donor class will tell you where to go. (Which is away from them.)

 

[henrygandorf 29176]

16 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Two good candidates left in the top.

The donor class will tell you where to go. (Which is away from them.)

 

this is a great grouping for pete.

even you know that.

[bad_teammate 13132]

10 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

this is a great grouping for pete.

even you know that.

For fundraising?

[henrygandorf 29176]

for juxtaposition.

[Js1 85109]

Just to be mentioned and seen in the same tier as Harris and Biden is great for him, if he can translate it into votes.  Honestly, he needs a top 4 showing in Iowa and New Hampshire.   

Edited July 19, 2019 by Js1

[6th Street 6357]

Odds are very slim for Pete, but if he keeps it cool he might land a solid spot on the Biden cabinet. 

[henrygandorf 29176]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Just to be mentioned and seen in the same tier as Harris and Biden is great for him, if he can translate it into votes.  Honestly, he needs a top 4 showing in Iowa and New Hampshire.   

he's running top 4 in the most recent iowa/nh polls.

we'll see what happens once biden freefalls.

[Message Board User 12389]

 

[TexEx15 17482]

Let’s acknowledge the biggest issue facing the Dems for 2020.  The primary is pushing everyone too far left.  Whomever gets the nom will likely have to backtrack to the center a bit to win the general creating plenty of ammo for Republicans.  Can anyone win the primary without drifting too far left?  That’s the question.

[Zonahorn 8079]

2 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Let’s acknowledge the biggest issue facing the Dems for 2020.  The primary is pushing everyone too far left.  Whomever gets the nom will likely have to backtrack to the center a bit to win the general creating plenty of ammo for Republicans.  Can anyone win the primary without drifting too far left?  That’s the question.

Good thing that isn’t the biggest issue

[Mojo Hand 4580]

2 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Let’s acknowledge the biggest issue facing the Dems for 2020.  The primary is pushing everyone too far left.  Whomever gets the nom will likely have to backtrack to the center a bit to win the general creating plenty of ammo for Republicans.  Can anyone win the primary without drifting too far left?  That’s the question.

I don't agree with any aspect of your premise. Of the candidates who matter, Biden and Mayor Pete haven't really moved to the left, Harris is so vague as to be wherever she wants to say she was later, and Sanders and Warren are where they've always been.    None of them will have to backtrack to win the general except Harris, on account of her taking both sides of every issue.  And the success of the candidates on the left so far is a great thing for the Dems' chances in the general, should one of them be the nominee. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Let’s acknowledge the biggest issue facing the Dems for 2020.  The primary is pushing everyone too far left.  Whomever gets the nom will likely have to backtrack to the center a bit to win the general creating plenty of ammo for Republicans.  Can anyone win the primary without drifting too far left?  That’s the question.

Universal Healthcare, gun control, climate change, and a more compassionate immigration system are wildly popular issues among the general population.  

These are not far left ideas.  The first thing most people need to do is stop cosplaying as corporate TV pundits when they talk about politics.  Focus on the actual problems and solutions and fuck the “left vs right” horse shit.  

The right is currently on another planet.  No one is talking about the Republicans playing to the center to win.  Why is that?  Why is the concern solely with the democrats?

[Js1 85109]

10 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Let’s acknowledge the biggest issue facing the Dems for 2020.  The primary is pushing everyone too far left.  Whomever gets the nom will likely have to backtrack to the center a bit to win the general creating plenty of ammo for Republicans.  Can anyone win the primary without drifting too far left?  That’s the question.

Donald Trump won the primary going hard right and didn’t moderate at all  Hillary was plenty left center  

More “Democrats are too far left!” bullshit. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

Donald Trump won the primary going hard right and didn’t moderate at all  Hillary was plenty left center  

False on both points.

Trump promised to protect the big social welfare programs and enact universal healthcare. Hillary wouldn't even commit to $15/hr and her health solution was "keep shopping".

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Trump pandered to everyone with outright lies to win and then governed like a compromised corporate grifter and traitor.

[bad_teammate 13132]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump pandered to everyone with outright lies to win and then governed like a compromised corporate grifter and traitor.

This is also true.

[6th Street 6357]

Trump actually showed up to campaign in the Rust Belt states and promised them that mfg jobs were coming back.

Hillary never even set foot in MI/WI and bragged about putting coal out of business. Worst run campaign since Dukakis

[Celery Man 20886]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump pandered to everyone with outright lies to win and then governed as a compromised corporate grifter and traitor.

fixed

[Hank Kingsley 20698]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

And?!?  The problem with answering questions about MFA is literally no one knows exactly how much it would cost because it’s never been done before.  

The only thing you can be certain about MFA is the cost of healthcare would be much cheaper.   How much cheaper?  Impossible to determine but I think a reasonable estimate to shoot for is around $4,000 per person per year.  It could easily be half or double that during a transition process.

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

And?!?  The problem with answering questions about MFA is literally no one knows exactly how much it would cost because it’s never been done before.  

The only thing you can be certain about MFA is the cost of healthcare would be much cheaper.   How much cheaper?  Impossible to determine but I think a reasonable estimate to shoot for is around $4,000 per person per year.  It could easily be half or double that during a transition process.

Again. Of course it would save money. That’s a given by any voter who Democrats could possibly reach. The questions are

1) what is “MFA”

2) what does “MFA” cover

3) Who does “MFA” cover

4) How long will the transition to “MFA” take

 

Then if you know those things you can talk about how much it costs. And nobody knows those things because they haven’t decided.

 

And it’s stupid to talk about those things, because nobody fucking cares except for progressive maximalists and healthcare policy nerds (like me).

 

This is why Democrats lose- they debate the merits of this or that flavor of hypothetical policy thinking that it will appeal to somebody instead of pitching the value proposition and result to the buyer/voter.

[6th Street 6357]

5 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

That's a horseshit answer. Nobody wants o be moved off their employee sponsored plan. 

[Hawndoh 2382]

2 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

That's a horseshit answer. Nobody wants o be moved off their employee sponsored plan. 

They would if the alternative is better. My employer sponsored plan is crap. I'd drop it in a second if there was a better option.

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

52 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

That's a horseshit answer. Nobody wants o be moved off their employee sponsored plan. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

[David Dennison 18656]

2 hours ago, 6th Street said:

That's a horseshit answer. Nobody wants o be moved off their employee sponsored plan. 

Works just fine for the olds.

[bad_teammate 13132]

"God damnit, I'm so mad that I'm about to be on Medicare!!!!" - 64-year-olds in the USA all the time

[UTDD 362]

12 hours ago, Js1 said:

Donald Trump won the primary going hard right and didn’t moderate at all  Hillary was plenty left center  

More “Democrats are too far left!” bullshit. 

I don't think Trump ran completely far right at all (yes of course on immigration and some other issues) and I thought he was more left than Hillary on a few issues.  He promised to keep certain social programs and even railed against corporate free trade agreements that he argued were hurting the manufacturing sector.  He appealed to blue collar whites by advocating specific populist policies that often appeal to more centrist voters traditionally, etc.  Now, maybe he flat out lied, (ok yes I'm down with that idea) but I don't think he ran hard right on everything.  Hillary's positions were not why she lost anyway, it was because she was Hillary Clinton the individual/character that she is that she lost.  

[UTDD 362]

2 hours ago, Hawndoh said:

They would if the alternative is better. My employer sponsored plan is crap. I'd drop it in a second if there was a better option.

Me too, although ideally I would like a great default option with the ability to augment my coverage with additional things if desired.  I always worry about only having one option because if it's not done well, you have some serious problems.  My worry about the federal government and corporations are really not all that different if there is an absence of the proper internal/external pressures/safeguards to ensure things are run well, etc.  

[Zavala 1384]

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1152773660622643209/pu/vid/778x360/XUVTobXK5gZrmJdB.mp4

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

3 hours ago, UTDD said:

I don't think Trump ran completely far right at all (yes of course on immigration and some other issues) and I thought he was more left than Hillary on a few issues.  He promised to keep certain social programs and even railed against corporate free trade agreements that he argued were hurting the manufacturing sector.  He appealed to blue collar whites by advocating specific populist policies that often appeal to more centrist voters traditionally, etc.  Now, maybe he flat out lied, (ok yes I'm down with that idea) but I don't think he ran hard right on everything.  Hillary's positions were not why she lost anyway, it was because she was Hillary Clinton the individual/character that she is that she lost.  

The point was Trump did not run as a moderate. He ran as an insurgent extremist. He was as far away from the norm as he could get away with.  Trying to minimize that by breaking down his individual policy proposals is kinda laughable.

[Bama Chick 28596]

[UTDD 362]

52 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The point was Trump did not run as a moderate. He ran as an insurgent extremist. He was as far away from the norm as he could get away with.  Trying to minimize that by breaking down his individual policy proposals is kinda laughable.

Overall yes on the macro level, but I don't think it's incorrect to say that with specific voters in key strategic areas specific policy positions didn't make a difference.  How Trump overall actually ran and even how you characterize that overall on a national level is completely irrelevant versus what strategic decisions may have actually swung enough voters.  It doesn't matter actually whether you think Trump ran as a moderate or extremist at all frankly (for 2016), what matters is that he took specific strategic policy positions that may have a made a difference in swinging enough voters where it counts.  If you think I am trying minimize his overall campaign as a whole by policy to say he is not "extreme" feels like a reading comprehension fail because that issue isn't that relevant overall, it's much more about the fact that taking specific positions - regardless of the overall tone nationally - mattered and might matter again.  If people focus too much on the overall tone of the campaign and ignore the actual strategies being employed, they risk their own defeat at their own peril.  If Trump 100% only ran as insurgent extremist and did not talk about specific issues important to voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, he probably loses.  Those positions were not extreme at all and in fact had some crossover with candidates more left than the typical Republican.  

Edited July 21, 2019 by UTDD

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[Js1 85109]

Which candidate has been most strong? 

Harris 32

Warren 24

Biden 22

Bernie 16

Pete 6

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Which candidate has been most strong? 

Harris 32

Warren 24

Biden 22

Bernie 16

Pete 6

Noteworthy from this article:

Biden does best among people who want "someone with a more polite tone and civility, even if you don't agree on every single policy," while Warren does best among people who want the opposite.

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

 

#imwithher

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

Noteworthy from this article:

Biden does best among people who want "someone with a more polite tone and civility, even if you don't agree on every single policy," while Warren does best among people who want the opposite.

But that’s part of why I’ve been on Harris from the beginning.

I think Tahoe is right if you peel away the problematic racial stuff- she feels like the candidate who the largest coalition of possible Democratic voters in the most states can possibly get behind.

 

She talks about policy in non-specific, positive results oriented terms without seeming vague beyond credibility (like Beto). She’s not too old, she’s not too young, and she’s experienced without such a long record that it presents excessive attack surface. She’s got a hard edge but seems funny and cool, and just as happy to fight as she is to dance, but not overly inclined to either pick unwinnable fights or give up winnable fights easily.

 

Everybody else has a big “but”. I don’t see one with Harris yet.

 

Pun as needed.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

17 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

But that’s part of why I’ve been on Harris from the beginning.

I think Tahoe is right if you peel away the problematic racial stuff- she feels like the candidate who the largest coalition of possible Democratic voters in the most states can possibly get behind.

 

She talks about policy in non-specific, positive results oriented terms without seeming vague beyond credibility (like Beto). She’s not too old, she’s not too young, and she’s experienced without such a long record that it presents excessive attack surface. She’s got a hard edge but seems funny and cool, and just as happy to fight as she is to dance, but not overly inclined to either pick unwinnable fights or give up winnable fights easily.

 

Everybody else has a big “but”. I don’t see one with Harris yet.

 

Pun as needed.

So you like her because she checks a bunch of superficial boxes that will draw the most appeal with the electorate?  

It’s as good of a reason as any I suppose. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26279]

So you like her because she checks a bunch of superficial boxes that will draw the most appeal with the electorate?  
It’s as good of a reason as any I suppose. 

Yes, that’s why I like her. We’re trying to beat Donald Trump in a popularity contest, not a policy debate.

[Js1 85109]

37 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

So you like her because she checks a bunch of superficial boxes that will draw the most appeal with the electorate?  

It’s as good of a reason as any I suppose. 

2008 called. It worked then. She can put together the Obama coalition that wins. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Yes, that’s why I like her. We’re trying to beat Donald Trump in a popularity contest, not a policy debate.

 

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

2008 called. It worked then. She can put together the Obama coalition that wins. 

The policy debate is to win the nomination.  The general election strategy should be about driving up turnout and energizing a huge amount of people. 

The primary messaging should focus on policy and “what are you going to do with power once it’s handed to you?”

The general election messaging should be focused on Trumpism and the existential threat it poses.  It should be an “all hands on deck” campaign strategy about defeating this terrorist to democracy.   

I still think Warren is more prepared to fight Trumpism than Harris and Warren is currently winning the whites.  That is going to matter.