The “Who is running in 2020?” tea leaves thread

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

So apparently Bob Iger was asked last week if he’d run for president, and he didn’t seem to rule it out, deflecting the question with “I have a full time job right now”:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The optics of a media company executive running for the nomination of the Democratic Party are comically terrible.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Wasn't Harriman involved in WW2 diplomatic efforts and served in Truman's admin? There'd be little precedent for an Iger Democratic Party candidacy (or Schultz/Cuban as well).

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Bullock pens op ed. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/05/opinion/steve-bullock-democrats-montana.html?

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

LOL: Garcetti not ruling it out.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is one of the saddest things I've ever read in Politico.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

HRC 2020 it's happening!

If you want to lose again to Trump, sure.

When's the last time that a losing GE presidential candidate from a major party ran in the very next election? Adlai Stevenson?

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

HRC 2020 it's happening!

If you want to lose again to Trump, sure.

When's the last time that a losing GE presidential candidate from a major party ran in the very next election? Adlai Stevenson?

Yep. There is also Nixon '60/'68 of course.

Nixon '68 would be HRC's best case. Worst case, she's a modern day Adlai or William Jennings Bryan.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Kirsten Gillibrand continues to display her dirty mouth:
"Has he kept his promises? No. F*** no."

https://twitter.com/hamiltonnolan/status/873186899606867968

This time it was actually caught on video though:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/go-the-fck-home-sen-kirsten-gillibrand-drops-f-bomb-at-nyu-forum/

At this point I've got to think this is part of a deliberate strategy to get national media attention.

Cynically, it could be a ploy for the youth vote in the primaries.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Kirsten Gillibrand continues to display her dirty mouth:
"Has he kept his promises? No. F*** no."

https://twitter.com/hamiltonnolan/status/873186899606867968

This time it was actually caught on video though:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/go-the-fck-home-sen-kirsten-gillibrand-drops-f-bomb-at-nyu-forum/

At this point I've got to think this is part of a deliberate strategy to get national media attention.

Cynically, it could be a ploy for the youth vote in the primaries.

Perhaps.  Of course, my guess is that most politicians swear frequently in their private lives, and *not* swearing in public is a political ploy designed to project a certain image, or just avoid controversy.  Gillibrand might figure that her political incentives run the other way, and she's better off just talking like she normally does.

Incidentally, her NY magazine profile from April didn't just include multiple f-bombs.  She also made repeated use of the words "sucks" and "dude".  Whether she normally talks like that in private conversations, or if she's just putting it on for effect, I don't know.

Either way, I look forward to some PG-13 rated Democratic primary debates in 2019.

I tend to agree with the idea that some - perhaps even most - politicians swear privately but tone it down in public to convey the right personal brand. The person, of course, varies; for instance, I doubt VP Pence would use such language, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear John McCain swear.

I also argue that the popular opinion at this moment in time seems to value "authenticity" and "cares about people like me" in a candidate. It's plausible that strategists noticed how the Internet and young voters reacted to Biden's "Big F**king deal" moment and Sen Sanders's "authenticity" and have attempted to calibrate accordingly.

As an aside, but partially related to the above, Gillibrand's interviews and policy shifts really lead me to believe that she's going to try the middle lane strategy of appealing to the Sanders wing and the HRC wing - she is staking out a leftward shift in domestic policy, a foreign policy approach more in line with Obama's than HRC's and also visibly supports and works hard on what is often derisively referred to as "women's issues" including sexual assault in the military and on campus, and paid parental leave.

 Her biggest hurdle is explaining her shift from past views when she represented upstate NY, but she strikes me as a particularly skilled politician. At one point in her NY Mag profile, she addresses it, noting that her constituency changed, which required her to be mote responsive to a broader range of issues. If she is able to convince others the way she did in her interview, I would put her as odds-on favorite to win the nom. If not, she'll be out the same time as Scott Walker was.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

One more thing...

I also argue that the popular opinion at this moment in time seems to value "authenticity" and "cares about people like me" in a candidate. It's plausible that strategists noticed how the Internet and young voters reacted to Biden's "Big F**king deal" moment and Sen Sanders's "authenticity" and have attempted to calibrate accordingly.

If this is a deliberate strategy on Gillibrand's part, I'm not sure to what extent she views swearing as a political plus in and of itself, and to what extent she might figure that it's politically neutral, but still a good way to get the national media talking about her.  When she drops the f-bombs, news outlets actually write stories about it.

The reason why I suspect it's either deliberately played up, or Sen. Gillibrand is simply not censoring herself the way other politicians do is two-fold: 1) as you point out, it generates headlines, clicks and attention (which is good!) and 2) doing so portrays a less "calibrated," "calculated," or "focus-tested" image, all of which dogged HRC. I suspect that this is the advantage that her and her advisors may find in "letting" Sen. Gillibrand speak however she wants in public. I absolutely grant that I'm probably reading too much into this, but "I'm probably reading too much into this" should be atlas's slogan.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Article on CNN regarding Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/11/politics/jeff-merkley-2020-plans-president/index.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Merkely is the second best option after his fellow Oregonian, Wyden. And since Wyden almost certainly won't run, Merkely is the best semi-probable choice.

The right question to ask is how Merkely's voice will stand out in a crowded primary and, perhaps more importantly, how he'll raise money. Absent Sanders and Warren running, Merkely may be able to leverage the Sanders database, but it's a leap to assume the Sanders donors will immediately support Merkely.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

I really do believe Franken when he says he's not going to run. The way he denies interest is more real than the way others do.

I can't remember where I heard it, but I've heard that he's deferring to Klobuchar if she runs. He knows that they'd cannibalize one another's base and it seemed like Franken feels he owes a lot of his political success to Klobuchar.