2020 Presidential Election

Whatever else you wanna rant about.
Post Reply
User avatar
Quann
Senior
Posts: 1393
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 11:17 pm
Location: Start Line, MA

2020 Presidential Election

Post by Quann » Wed Dec 04, 2019 6:28 pm

Thought I’d start this up. I always enjoy the political banter on here. What is everybody thinking on the Democratic side?

Online
User avatar
m626t
Senior
Posts: 1761
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 8:24 pm
Location: Western Mass

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by m626t » Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:12 pm

OK, I'll bite. I'm thinking the Dems need a candidate who is not elderly, is an intelligent, camera friendly non socialist who is a mild liberal on domestic issues and somewhat of a hawk on foreign policy.. and a strong supporter of our military. "Progressives" need not apply if Trump is to be defeated ( assuming he survives impeachment ). Is there a Scoop Jackson out there somewhere who can come to our rescue?
All due respect, and I mean that from the bottom of my heart, I'm gonna pass.

User avatar
Bubba
Sophomore
Posts: 206
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 6:51 pm

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Bubba » Thu Dec 05, 2019 1:00 pm

I agree, the right keeps heading right-ward, the left keeps heading left-ward, menawhile the vast majority of us are in the middle of those two hoping eventually, someone will run from the middle-ish area of the spectrum. The trouble is, anytime someone from the middle runs, no one supports them.

User avatar
e_parade
Junior
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:15 pm
Location: Boston

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by e_parade » Thu Dec 05, 2019 2:50 pm

Sorry for what's to come below here. I pay way too much attention to this sort of thing and like providing details.
m626t wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:12 pm
OK, I'll bite. I'm thinking the Dems need a candidate who is not elderly, is an intelligent, camera friendly non socialist who is a mild liberal on domestic issues and somewhat of a hawk on foreign policy.. and a strong supporter of our military. "Progressives" need not apply if Trump is to be defeated ( assuming he survives impeachment ). Is there a Scoop Jackson out there somewhere who can come to our rescue?
The word socialist gets thrown around too often and usually inaccurately (not trying to single you out here despite the quote). The media loves it because it brings in the ratings more than using what the actual terminologies would be. But you're basically saying you want Mayor Pete out of the current crop of candidates.

While Bernie is closer to socialism than most other candidates, he's more advocating for a social democracy.
Social democracy is a political, social and economic philosophy that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented economy.
FDR would also be in the same boat (not saying this to rile things up, it's literally what happened back then as well):
Conservatives feared the New Deal meant socialism and Roosevelt privately noted in 1934 that the "old line press harps increasingly on state socialism and demands the return to the good old days." In his 1936 Madison Square Garden speech, Roosevelt pledged to continue the New Deal and criticized those who were putting their greed, personal gain and politics over national economic recovery from the Great Depression. In the speech, Roosevelt also described forces which he labeled as "the old enemies of peace: business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering" and went on to claim that these forces were united against his candidacy, that "they are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred." In 1941, Roosevelt added the freedom from want and freedom from fear as part of his Four Freedoms goal. In 1944, Roosevelt also called for a Second Bill of Rights that would have expanded many social and economic rights for the workers such as the right for every American to have access to a job and universal healthcare. This economic bill of rights was taken up as a mantle by the People's Program for 1944 of the Congress of Industrial Organizations, a platform that has been described as "aggressive social-democratic" for the post-war era
A lot of that could basically be copy/pasted directly into Bernie's platform.



All that having been said...the media still sways a shit ton of everything so we've likely seen what Sanders would be possible to accomplish in 2016 (at best come in 2nd place and win some primaries). Warren, not being as far left (and actually officially in the party), might have a bit more she can do. The two of them both running probably caps out what they could get done. However, polling from not too long ago suggested that Warren was most likely to benefit from a Harris dropout (just under 40% of Harris backers said Warren was their number 2, Biden had about 20%). And while there wasn't a ton left in there at this point, it's still a couple of ticks in the upward direction.

Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Buttigieg will all be in decent shape heading into Iowa and New Hampshire. Pretty sure that all of them have led the polls in one or both of those states over the past couple of months.

Yang has a solid, albeit small backing. But it comes with good financial backing. He'll be sticking around but not winning anything (and potentially would be considered for a cabinet position, but not VP). Bloomberg and Steyer are made of money and will spend it (Bloomberg just spent ~$40 million in ads over the past month). Don't think either will break through to the top, but they might be successful in pushing issues onto the platform.

Booker is likely in trouble, but might be able to stick it out until Iowa/NH before dropping. He also may drop out before then, but he won't be winning much of anything at this point. Klobuchar is similar, but in slightly better shape since she's already qualified for the next debate. Gabbard has a similar loyal backing to Yang, but not the financial resources from it...and she's also rubbing the party the wrong way lately. She might get forced out.

Castro will probably be the next to drop out (of the people who we remember are still running, that is).

Basically no one else is worth mentioning a prediction on.


Other than Patrick, who will almost certainly absolutely nothing.

User avatar
Quann
Senior
Posts: 1393
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 11:17 pm
Location: Start Line, MA

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Quann » Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:14 pm

^^^^
I’m not a registered Democrat but I really like the ideas coming from Tulsi, Yang and Steyer. If Warren wins the nomination, we’ll be saying President Trump until 2024.

User avatar
e_parade
Junior
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:15 pm
Location: Boston

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by e_parade » Fri Dec 06, 2019 11:33 am

Quann wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:14 pm
^^^^
I’m not a registered Democrat but I really like the ideas coming from Tulsi, Yang and Steyer. If Warren wins the nomination, we’ll be saying President Trump until 2024.
I'm also not a registered democrat (and never have been). I love the confusing looks at the primaries when I walk up and they're like "Wait...what does the U mean?" Though it doesn't give much confidence in them if they don't know it means "Unenrolled" and that I'm able to pick which primary to participate in that day.

inthescoop
Hall of Fame
Posts: 3008
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 7:40 pm
Location: NYC

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by inthescoop » Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:29 pm

Quann wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:14 pm
^^^^
I’m not a registered Democrat but I really like the ideas coming from Tulsi, Yang and Steyer. If Warren wins the nomination, we’ll be saying President Trump until 2024.
What is it that you really like from these 3 candidates by the way?

----

Agreed with the term Socialism being tossed around by the media and right in such a negative and vague fashion at the moment. You hear the right saying, "Oh we will never adapt and become a socialist country." These same folks do not know that their retirement, welfare, and social security, are all based on socialist economic systems of growth.

Imagine the outcry today if a president proposed free public libraries. "OHH NOOOOO WE CANNOT LET SOCIALISM WIN!!!!" :lol: :lol:

If you are on the fence on whether or not you will vote for Trump again, then there is your answer; human rights are not a problematic concern for you. Then again, I think we understand over time that at the end of the day, most folks only care about themselves.

User avatar
DEM
Senior
Posts: 1377
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 8:42 am
Location: Baltimore

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by DEM » Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:43 pm

e_parade wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 2:50 pm
Sorry for what's to come below here. I pay way too much attention to this sort of thing and like providing details.
m626t wrote:
Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:12 pm
OK, I'll bite. I'm thinking the Dems need a candidate who is not elderly, is an intelligent, camera friendly non socialist who is a mild liberal on domestic issues and somewhat of a hawk on foreign policy.. and a strong supporter of our military. "Progressives" need not apply if Trump is to be defeated ( assuming he survives impeachment ). Is there a Scoop Jackson out there somewhere who can come to our rescue?
The word socialist gets thrown around too often and usually inaccurately (not trying to single you out here despite the quote). The media loves it because it brings in the ratings more than using what the actual terminologies would be. But you're basically saying you want Mayor Pete out of the current crop of candidates.

While Bernie is closer to socialism than most other candidates, he's more advocating for a social democracy.
Social democracy is a political, social and economic philosophy that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented economy.
FDR would also be in the same boat (not saying this to rile things up, it's literally what happened back then as well):
Conservatives feared the New Deal meant socialism and Roosevelt privately noted in 1934 that the "old line press harps increasingly on state socialism and demands the return to the good old days." In his 1936 Madison Square Garden speech, Roosevelt pledged to continue the New Deal and criticized those who were putting their greed, personal gain and politics over national economic recovery from the Great Depression. In the speech, Roosevelt also described forces which he labeled as "the old enemies of peace: business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking, class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering" and went on to claim that these forces were united against his candidacy, that "they are unanimous in their hate for me — and I welcome their hatred." In 1941, Roosevelt added the freedom from want and freedom from fear as part of his Four Freedoms goal. In 1944, Roosevelt also called for a Second Bill of Rights that would have expanded many social and economic rights for the workers such as the right for every American to have access to a job and universal healthcare. This economic bill of rights was taken up as a mantle by the People's Program for 1944 of the Congress of Industrial Organizations, a platform that has been described as "aggressive social-democratic" for the post-war era
A lot of that could basically be copy/pasted directly into Bernie's platform.

All that having been said...the media still sways a shit ton of everything so we've likely seen what Sanders would be possible to accomplish in 2016 (at best come in 2nd place and win some primaries). Warren, not being as far left (and actually officially in the party), might have a bit more she can do. The two of them both running probably caps out what they could get done. However, polling from not too long ago suggested that Warren was most likely to benefit from a Harris dropout (just under 40% of Harris backers said Warren was their number 2, Biden had about 20%). And while there wasn't a ton left in there at this point, it's still a couple of ticks in the upward direction.

Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Buttigieg will all be in decent shape heading into Iowa and New Hampshire. Pretty sure that all of them have led the polls in one or both of those states over the past couple of months.
Agree with much of what you wrote above. "Liberal" corporate media (MSNBC, CNN) are still influential and clearly do not approve of Bernie Sanders (neither are they big fans of Yang or Tulsi Gabbard, but those candidates don't appear to have a significant shot at the nomination right now anyhow, though who knows what would happen in a hypothetical world where they had the approval of mainstream media). Still, this primary will be a good case study for what they may or may not still be capable of in this day and age. They have taken turns manufacturing consent for Beto, Buttigieg, Harris, Warren, Klobuchar, and more recently Buttigieg again, and they have been effective some of the time (Warren, Buttigieg) and not so effective at other times (Beto, Klobuchar, for example).

One place a disconnect in corporate media's attempt to craft corporate opinion is showing is in the poll numbers between age groups. There was a recent poll that showed Bernie's polls amongst 18-35 age group at 52% (!) while the next highest was 17% (I believe that was Warren), and conversely, insanely low numbers amongst seniors. That's astounding to me, and I take it to mean, at least in part, that cable news now has limited influence among that younger demographic, who tends to obtain much of their news over the internet which is much harder to filter. I think it also shows how much of a wild card this primary could be. A lot of it will depend on whether that younger demographic (and the multiracial working class) shows up in larger than usual numbers, because at this point, they could out vote the usual "white liberal" demographic that typically makes up the constituency of democratic primary voters.

User avatar
econalum
Senior
Posts: 1878
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 10:31 am
Location: Acton, MA

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by econalum » Tue Feb 11, 2020 11:37 pm

Re-opening this forum after a long pause.

Simple question. Is all of this early primary voting moot, if 'late to enter' candidate Bloomberg can rise into near/actual poll leadership by simply throwing impactful ads on tv, at a rate of $250m and climbing daily?

'Super Tuesday' means retail politics disappear toward mass marketing, right?

The second question is are the current/past DEM candidates simply vying to be VP?

Discuss.
Feeling entitled is JUST a feeling...

User avatar
MJatUM
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4404
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:46 pm
Location: Attleboro

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by MJatUM » Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:42 am

Let Bloomberg debate. He'll either sink or swim. Tom Steyer bought his way into the race but he's been wallpaper at the debates and has zero traction.

User avatar
e_parade
Junior
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:15 pm
Location: Boston

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by e_parade » Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:35 am

econalum wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 11:37 pm
Re-opening this forum after a long pause.

Simple question. Is all of this early primary voting moot, if 'late to enter' candidate Bloomberg can rise into near/actual poll leadership by simply throwing impactful ads on tv, at a rate of $250m and climbing daily?

'Super Tuesday' means retail politics disappear toward mass marketing, right?

The second question is are the current/past DEM candidates simply vying to be VP?

Discuss.
Bloomberg has the potential to spoil it for the moderate candidates who have been performing well (Buttigieg and Klobuchar) by taking away a ton of votes from them on Super Tuesday. It's unlikely he'll have enough of an impact to take sole possession of the lead in delegates, but he definitely has the potential to impact the race significantly. Currently the odds are:

Most likely: Sanders (not even a 40% shot though)
Second most likely: Contested convention (someone has a plurality but not majority of the delegates - this is also barely behind the likelihood of Sanders)

After that it's a mishmash. Buttigieg and Klobuchar haven't polled well with minorities and the next two states are both very dependent on their vote. Sanders has polled well with Latinos, so Nevada is likely another #1 finish, probably at worst #2. However it also hasn't really been polled lately, so who the hell knows at this point.


As for VP? Castro has been trying, but linked himself mostly to Warren...which doesn't bode well. Harris has gotta be up there still, especially as the diversity falls out.

User avatar
Quann
Senior
Posts: 1393
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 11:17 pm
Location: Start Line, MA

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Quann » Wed Feb 12, 2020 5:04 pm

Bummed that Yang is out but he’s a smart tech savvy guy so hopefully he tries again in 2024. I love Steyers platform and think he would do well against the Donald but people are so scared to vote for someone with no prior public office experience in this race. Just my thought but Bernie and Mayor Pete have no shot in the general election. I think Klobuchar appeals to moderate dems, Republicans, and independents. She’s the best shot in my opinion.

User avatar
MJatUM
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4404
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:46 pm
Location: Attleboro

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by MJatUM » Thu Feb 13, 2020 10:39 am

At this point in time I think a Bernie-Amy ticket is the Dems best bet... Will be interesting to see how Klobo does in SC and Nevada.

User avatar
e_parade
Junior
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:15 pm
Location: Boston

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by e_parade » Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:48 pm

That would be a solid ticket for sure. Would also be good to give an early preview of some potential cabinet positions should they win (like saying Yang will be secretary of commerce, or some other decent position in there).

I really just think with how he did and improved over the course of the campaign that Yang needs to be given a cabinet position so he can grow politically and make another run. He brought in a different kind of energy and a different kind of supporter. Was great to see.


I think my favorite suggestion would be a Bernie/Pete campaign because it would essentially be Doc and Marty going up against Biff.

Berkman
Hall of Fame
Posts: 5562
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: Mooresville, NC
Contact:

Re: 2020 Presidential Election

Post by Berkman » Fri Feb 14, 2020 11:06 am

I can't see any of them beating Trump.

Post Reply