The “Who is running in 2020?” tea leaves thread, Part 3

[Rookie Yinzer]

It's a shame that the Democrats will end up nominating another candidate who plays the I'm Not Trump/identity politics card, only to get crushed in the states that are more willing to support a candidate like Bullock.

A candidate acknowledging that they are a woman and/or a person of color is not identity politics. Sending troops to the border to combat a "caravan" of defenseless brown women and children to win an election is identity politics.

Anyway I hope Bullock or Beto is the nominee because they both will make compelling candidates against Trump. Frontrunners like Biden, Warren, Booker, Harris, and Sanders will fall flat for a variety of reasons.

[Rookie Yinzer]

These boring white male Senators have zero chance. They will lose as badly as Dodd did in 2008.

I really wonder what's going through their head to make them think they'd have any shot. Honestly it's not hard to read the trends of what base of the Dem party wants. It's female and non-white, its pretty obvious too but so many are intent on wasting their time and money.

Beto wouldn’t have that problem.

But yes, some of these old, boring, centrist white men need to sit down. Even if they tow the line on the mainstream issues they are extremely out of touch with the issues that excite and drive people to the polls.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Isn't it more the fact that Gillum massively undperformed while Abrams slightly underperformed and beto overperformed

Abrams lost by 1 when she was the underdog the entire race and many people thought her candidacy would show us what the absolute floor was for a GA Dem in a D-friendly year. She did not underperform.

Anyway she needs to run for statewide office in GA. She's needed here. Beto has no chance of winning statewide in TX if he couldn't close the deal against Cruz in a blue wave. Not his fault. The fundamentals were just against him. His performance in the suburbs would make him formidable in MI, WI, PA, NC, AZ, and GA maybe even make Trump spend money in TX.

Gillum is an absolute embarrassment. His performance was pitiful and he should retire from politics.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Gillum is a failure. I roll my eyes every time he is coupled with Beto and Stacey. He lost to someone who ran a Neo-Nazi facebook page and refused to return the donation of someone who called Obama a Muslim N____r in a swing state that Obama won twice (!) so I don't want to hear about the Bradley effect.

[Rookie Yinzer]

This participation trophy candidacy trend lately with Dems is weird, oh you lost but you still can run for President even if you lost a completely winnable race. It's infuriating considering there are perfectly good Dems out there like Klobuchar who seriously have amazing electoral records.

She’s boring and doesn’t come across as an activist on any issue. Sorry. Electoral records mean nothing, if they ever did. It’s about how candidates make people feel.

I know for a fact that Abrams is not running for President though so you can scratch that off the list.

[Rookie Yinzer]

This participation trophy candidacy trend lately with Dems is weird, oh you lost but you still can run for President even if you lost a completely winnable race. It's infuriating considering there are perfectly good Dems out there like Klobuchar who seriously have amazing electoral records.

She’s boring and doesn’t come across as an activist on any issue. Sorry. Electoral records mean nothing, if they ever did. It’s about how candidates make people feel.

I know for a fact that Abrams is not running for President though so you can scratch that off the list.

Aren't electoral records the best record of how people feel? Voting participation rate vs political apathy/excitement, political support vs opposition, opinions on public records, all of these can be found via voting records. In fact, just asking "how do people feel" isn't really important insofar as it doesn't matter how excited you are if you don't or won't vote.

Sure, maybe certain candidates don't draw crowds of millions to cling onto every word. But that literally doesn't matter at all at the point where voters decide that a candidate is exciting, important, smart, savvy, likeable, or positively-performing enough to continue to hold the seat.

Maybe candidates aren't "activists" on any issues -- which honestly is itself a really poor assessment of anybody -- but as long as they get votes, it doesn't matter. They did something right that caused them to get into their seat. Maybe they can do it on a bigger scale. Maybe not. But to say that it's a matter of excitability and that "electoral records mean nothing" is just absurdly reductionist.

You know what.... you're right. When I read the initial post my brain was thinking more-so about policy achievements, ability to "work across the aisle", "experience" etc. because that's been one of the main talking points for Klobuchar. My bad.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Kamala should choose Atlanta. The South will be the backbone of her campaign + she should be investing in a massive effort to turn out POC in the Sun Belt. Abrams came within 50,000 votes with young voters still not matching their usual Presidential share of the electorate. It, Florida, and North Carolina will be important states for her if she wins the nomination.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Atlanta is the de facto capital of black America, it makes sense from that standpoint.

I thought that was Chicago.

It is. Please don't believe these costal dems.

No it's not. You don't even know what you're talking about. LOL.

[Rookie Yinzer]

To reaffirm what others have said, its easy to fall into rather broad generalisations about the African-American vote, and how it changed. To pick up on a few things.

1.) IIRC Clinton was winning among AA's until late 2007- largely because as Adam mentions, her name ID was through the roof, and she had extremely strong ties among black lawmakers and community group. The AA vote didn't just bolt onto Obama when he announced.

2.) The African-American vote really needs to be split into Age, Region and Gender; there's such a vast political difference between say a 67 year black women from South Carolina, and a 19 black guy from Oakland.

3.) But finally, it should be remembered that the AA vote is disproportionately powerful in the deep southern states- where IIRC the AA electorate are older and much more female.

If I was advising Harris or Booker, I'd be chasing that vote for the whole campaign.   

Yeah, Bernie beat Hillary among black voters under 30 52-47 and I’m sure it was by double digits if you take out the South. Obama was a candidate who was able to inspire all factions of black voters. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker are not him. Add in misogyny, disillusion after electing the first black president really didn’t change anything. There is a plausible scenario that Bernie or Beto can overperform with black voters in the Midwest even while Kamala wins the black voters in the South. I personally think Cory is DOA. The overwhelmingly black and female primaries in the Deep South will default to the woman. Especially if she can snag an endorsement from black women like Maxine Waters, Stacey Abrams, Terri Sewell, etc

[Rookie Yinzer]

Steve Bullock should run for Senate at this point. He has no lane with Warren, O'Rourke, and Sanders in the race.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I doubt he’d win the primaries but Biden is right in saying that he’s the Democrats’ best hope in 2020. Appeals to the blue collar workers in ways that other candidates cannot, and that is the key to winning back the Rust Belt and therefore the White House.

When has Biden won in an election in a state with blue collar workers? Being Obama’s second banana doesn’t count and is irrelevant. Most people couldn’t pick the VP out in a lineup. Biden is a perpetual loser in presidential politics. And white blue collar workers are not the only key to win back the White House. Some of you continuously act like other demographics don’t live in these states.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I wanna know what is going on in Seth Moulton's mind that tells him that running for President is a good idea, let alone what even makes him think he even stands a chance winning the nomination after his attempted coup against Pelosi fell flat?

I was imagining Eric Swalwell's face in my head until I typed his name in on Google. He really needs to sit down.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I like how so many people here are opposed to Brown seeking the Presidency instead of keeping his seat in Ohio, but no-one is complaining about the idea of the Democrats' best candidate in Texas running for President and not the Senate. Not inconsistent at all...

One's a senator and one's a hypothetical. How you can't differentiate that idk.

But surely if Beto O'Rourke is so great 'the next Obama' he should be the Democrats' best chance of taking a Democrat trending state in 2020? Not just a 'hypothetical'?

Texas is a Likely R state. You’re reaching. Sherrod Brown giving up a seat is f-cking stupid. Beto is not going to win the Senate seat in a year with more Republicans turning out and a less polarizing opponent.

[Rookie Yinzer]

So much this. No one is safe from criticism, and the whole point of the primary is to air these disputes and to let the voters decide. Stop acting like every revelation will lead to a Trump victory.

Everytime someone has a valid criticism about Bernie we are told that that's not what he meant, we didn't see what we saw, we heard it wrong, or we have Bernie Derangement Syndrome....

[Rookie Yinzer]

So much this. No one is safe from criticism, and the whole point of the primary is to air these disputes and to let the voters decide. Stop acting like every revelation will lead to a Trump victory.

Everytime someone has a valid criticism about Bernie we are told that that's not what he meant, we didn't see what we saw, we heard it wrong, or we have Bernie Derangement Syndrome....

Oh Please, if one were to actually watch the 2016 primary unfold, one would see that many stances Sanders had, such as on guns, were heavily criticized. Saying he was treated like someone special is pure historical revisionism.

Seriously, no one is safe from criticism, not Sanders, not Harris, not Beto, and not Biden. Thats literally the whole point of holding a primary.

He was treated with kid gloves by the media and Hillary's campaign because his cultists acted like cry babies and perpetuated that the media was in the tank for Hillary (even though she recieved the most negative press of ALL the candidates). I hope Sanders runs so we can finally skewer his problematic record and infeasible plans.

[Rookie Yinzer]

So much this. No one is safe from criticism, and the whole point of the primary is to air these disputes and to let the voters decide. Stop acting like every revelation will lead to a Trump victory.

Everytime someone has a valid criticism about Bernie we are told that that's not what he meant, we didn't see what we saw, we heard it wrong, or we have Bernie Derangement Syndrome....

Oh Please, if one were to actually watch the 2016 primary unfold, one would see that many stances Sanders had, such as on guns, were heavily criticized. Saying he was treated like someone special is pure historical revisionism.

Seriously, no one is safe from criticism, not Sanders, not Harris, not Beto, and not Biden. Thats literally the whole point of holding a primary.

He was treated with kid gloves by the media and Hillary's campaign because his cultists acted like cry babies and perpetuated that the media was in the tank for Hillary (even though she recieved the most negative press of ALL the candidates). I hope Sanders runs so we can finally skewer his problematic record and infeasible plans.

lol what? are you ashamed? did you sleep through 2015 and 2016?

I'm not going to spend too much time arguing FACTS with you. Hillary received the most negative press in 2016. The email servers received wall to wall coverage. Trump's coverage was focused on building the wall and banning Muslims. Coverage focused on his POLICIES and the ratings hungry media gave him billions of dollars of free media because his POLICIES were so controversial. Like him or not, his MESSAGE got plenty of coverage. Hillary's did not.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I mean, the "Sanders Supporters who criticize literally everyone" voted for Clinton by a margin of 91-9, much better than the ratio for Clinton voters in 2008(73-27) and Trump(88-12). So the latter group proved that they are willing to do the responsible thing and vote for the Democrat in the general, while the former hasnt proven themselves at all yet.

This is very disingenuous. The Clinton 2008 coalition is not the Clinton 2016 coalition.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I mean, the "Sanders Supporters who criticize literally everyone" voted for Clinton by a margin of 91-9, much better than the ratio for Clinton voters in 2008(73-27) and Trump(88-12). So the latter group proved that they are willing to do the responsible thing and vote for the Democrat in the general, while the former hasnt proven themselves at all yet.

This is very disingenuous. The Clinton 2008 coalition is not the Clinton 2016 coalition.

What are you talking about? Everything I said is true. The Clinton 2016 coalition never had to vote for Sanders, so they havent proven themselves, while the Sanders 2016 coalition did prove themselves, especially when compared to historical defections.

Even so, you brought up Clinton 2008 knowing good and well a significant portion of her coalition were registered Democrats who abandoned the Dems at the federal level years before. Clinton 2016 was much more diverse and significant numbers of working class brown and black people who ALWAYS coalesce behind the nominee even when they ignore their interests.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Hickenlooper reiterates that he plans to decide on whether to run by March:

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2019/01/23/john-hickenlooper-2020-president-campaign/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Waaaaaay too late. Everyone who’s anyone will be in by Valentine’s Day.

The current Pres was the Last to decide in 2016.

The current pres was also super famous before he ran for President, not some non-entity Governor with a weird name.

This. The only people who could wait that long and have a meaningful chance to win are Biden and Sanders.

[Rookie Yinzer]

"Biden allies" say that the fact that the Bide-man has missed his self-imposed deadlines for making a decision doesn't mean he's not going to run:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/427052-biden-allies-say-he-doesnt-have-to-rush-into-race

You must be logged in to read this quote.

He is such an attention whore.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Bloomberg, Biden and TMac now reconsidering and less likely to run due to Dem leftward shift.

It's not 1996 anymore. Thank god.

[Rookie Yinzer]

The Twitter war this is going to launch is going to be entertaining.

[Rookie Yinzer]

The thought of a Joe Biden run makes me physically ill.

[Rookie Yinzer]

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1100516655061520385

If his family’s on board than he’s in.

His family was on board with it in 2016 tho

Obama (rightfully) told him to sit his incompetent ass down. This is going to be a disaster.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Biden's implosion is going to be biblical. He'll lead every poll after he announces. The honeymoon period will be real. But what comes after -- the POP. The collapse.

I can't wait to see him drop out.