Mark Cuban for the Democrats?

[Progressive]

Would have to throw out the Bernie voters, but if he ran as a centrist technocrat in the general, he could easily peel off a good 25% of Republican voters who are disgusted with Trump. I'm in favor of anything that makes the Marxist wing of the Democrat party as irrelevant as possible.

Are the Bernie voters *really* looking for ideological purity? How many would support Tulsi Gabbard despite a long record of "impure" political positions?

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Would have to throw out the Bernie voters, but if he ran as a centrist technocrat in the general, he could easily peel off a good 25% of Republican voters who are disgusted with Trump. I'm in favor of anything that makes the Marxist wing of the Democrat party as irrelevant as possible.

Are the Bernie voters *really* looking for ideological purity? How many would support Tulsi Gabbard despite a long record of "impure" political positions?

Their fascination with Gabbard continues to be puzzling to me. It's mainly because she was a staunch Sanders supporter, I guess.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Tulsi Gabbard is fascinating because she reminds Dems of so much potential Clinton had before the Libya crisis which thwarted her presidency.  Not, just the Sanders supporters.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Most of the Tulsibots are Republicans, not Sanders supporters.

[Lief 🗽]

Tulsi Gabbard is fascinating because she reminds Dems of so much potential Clinton had before the Libya crisis which thwarted her presidency.  Not, just the Sanders supporters.

Uh, no, she does not.

[Progressive]

PPP

[ApatheticAustrian]

cuban was one of hillary's best surrogates, imho, also regarding the mail clusterfick.

but i am not sure, he would be a good weapon after 4 years of trump.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

cuban was one of hillary's best surrogates, imho, also regarding the mail clusterfick.

but i am not sure, he would be a good weapon after 4 years of trump.

Cuban isn't gonna ruin his relationship with David Hasselholf who is a conservative, and his Dallas Mavericks franchise, by running for president in a state like Texas.

But he will endorse the eventual president, who will be a Democratic in 2020, in a redistricting year, which favors the Democrats.

[Mr. Morden]

Cuban comes out against the universal basic income:

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/22/mark-cuban-basic-income-worst-response-to-job-losses-from-robots-ai.html

[Maxwell]

i'd rather not have an Ayn Rand Boat namer and "pro-business" technoservative as the Democrat nominee. Otherwise the party would literally have no meaning.

[Skill and Chance]

For president, no.  But he would be the best candidate they could possibly recruit for statewide office in Texas.  There would have to be an understanding that he was the Texas version of JBE or Manchin on some national Dem issues, though.

[Skill and Chance]

i'd rather not have an Ayn Rand Boat namer and "pro-business" technoservative as the Democrat nominee. Otherwise the party would literally have no meaning.

What would you like to see instead, though?  Democratic options for winning national elections and/or control of congress basically look like this right now:

1. Court anti-Trump libertarians and free traders- Mark Cuban for president would be an extreme example, Cory Booker would represent a more gradual shift.

2. Court working class populists- to do this, though, you need someone who has Bernie's views on economic issues and Joe Manchin's views on most social issues.  Will the Dem base stomach that?

3.  Change nothing and wait for the economy to crash- but you could be waiting 10+ years, particularly if the next recession is a mild one like 2000-01 or occurs during the 1st year of a presidential term.

[Maxwell]

what's the point of winning the white house with a candidate like Mark Cuban? It's one step away from nominating John Fing Kasich, who stands against Democrats 95% of the time, but golly gee, he's such a nice guy!

There's no point for the party to exist at that point.

The assumption that electorates stand still is pretty stupid - turnout in 2016 was pretty weak for Democrats in certain demographics, lowering the gap in certain demographics won't be too hard with the right candidates. There's also such a thing as bringing in new voters - upping turnout (something I doubt a candidate like Mark Cuban would do). We don't need to nominate someone who has made it clear their ideology is to the right of any recent Democratic nominee just to win. Things are not that dire.