US Presidential Election 2020

MadYaker

Danzy wrote: »

He'll campaign on the red hot U.S. economy and jobs market.

He'll show how his crackdown on illegal migration has massively benfitted working class America, whether they are white, black or hispanic.

He talk foreign policy, mostly he'll appeal to America as a non interventionist President abroad, which they yearn for.

He can appeal to his base on getting 2 more supreme court justices, probably, in next term.

He hasn't got the wall but illegal migration is falling, as a % population is now at the lowest in 15 years, see this for fast rising wages for American Working Class.

That is just a few.

He is not certain to win but he'll be difficult to beat and the Democrat nominees are weak by any standard.

The only people who believe who believe Donald is responsible for the economy are the cultists who will vote for him regardless.

Illegal immigration has been on a steady decline since before Obama got elected.

He probably try and talk up the North Korea meetings

hill16bhoy

hill16bhoy wrote: »

And they sure aren't going to be fixed by electing a "centrist".

It doesn't matter who they elect. That is a bi-product of what is going on. Voting for the right person won't fix any of the issues.

eire4

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Voter suppression and vote rigging

For sure Voter suppression will be a significant factor next year as it was in 2016. Just another aspect of how broken and corrupted their system is.

eagle eye

Loafing Oaf wrote:

No such thing as a decent, smart woman in your eyes?

Not this time around.

pixelburp

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It doesn't matter who they elect. That is a bi-product of what is going on. Voting for the right person won't fix any of the issues.

It won't, but it's a better start than re-electing the spoofer currently in the spot. Who arguably is stoking the increasing hyper-partisanship seen in the lower houses. And a better start would include a president with an actual set of principles and priorities manifest in policy goals.

There are so many things broken in the American political system and

Danzy

Looking at the growing feud between the Justice Democrats and the rest of their party the Dems may do well to be one party in 2020, never mind win.

After AOC said Pelosi was attacking congress women who were women of colour, over not going along with the rest of the caucus.

The House Democrats twitter account accused AOC chief of staff of singling out a congress woman who is native America.

What a clusterfup of righteous assholes.

eire4

eagle eye wrote: »

None of those mentioned in the two posts above will beat Trump.
It's a sad state of affairs when the party can't see wood from the trees.
They need to find a centre candidate, a decent, smart man, and all get behind him.

I am going to disagree. The last thing America needs is another corporate Democrat in the white house. They have elected corporate Democrats in Clinton and Obama both of whom were 2 term presidents and it has done nothing to arrest the decline of Democracy in the US nor has it done anything to arrest the growing gap between the haves and have nots with income inequality continuing to get worse and don't get me started on Democratic health care aka as Obama care which has just seen costs continue to sky rocket and the quality of care and options for people to dwindle.
As I have said before the 2 party system at this point is obviously broken and corrupted by money to the point that really it is hard to call the US a Democracy anymore at best it is an oligarchy that scarily is showing signs of slipping towards authoritarianism. The last thing the US needs is more of the same as since Carter that has been a disaster economically for the vast majority of Americans.

Danzy

eire4 wrote: »

I am going to disagree. The last thing America needs is another corporate Democrat in the white house. They have elected corporate Democrats in Clinton and Obama both of whom were 2 term presidents and it has done nothing to arrest the decline of Democracy in the US nor has it done anything to arrest the growing gap between the haves and have nots with income inequality continuing to get worse and don't get me started on Democratic health care aka as Obama care which has just seen costs continue to sky rocket and the quality of care and options for people to dwindle.
As I have said before the 2 party system at this point is obviously broken and corrupted by money to the point that really it is hard to call the US a Democracy anymore at best it is an oligarchy that scarily is showing signs of slipping towards authoritarianism.

Agree with your post up to the dramatic last 4 lines.

The problem for the Dems is more mundane than the times we are in.

They have 19 candidates that are bland by the standards of any election.

Trump was a stand out, Obama was, Clinto was , Dubya was folksy and warm, thick, but his opponents were forgettable.

If the Dems field does not narrow quickly, people will lose interest and no momentum may build behind the one who dies get it.

rossie1977

Dems field will narrow to 4-5 by Super Tuesday so no rush yet as the campaign won't ramp up until then

You mentioned things Trump can call on but fact is he is record setting unpopular. He is double digits underwater in the key rust-belt states. He has clearly failed to deliver there. Voters in Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin don't care about supreme court judges or Dow at record levels or the national unemployment figures..if they did Hillary would have walked it as Obama had record setting increases in Dow and huge fall in unemployment.

If Trump had kept the insane rhetoric to a minimum he likely would have won a second term easily as the US economy has been on rise for a decade with no sign of slowing. However he hasn't and that's why he has a major fight on his hands where one shouldn't have existed.

Danzy

rossie1977 wrote: »

Dems field will narrow to 4-5 by Super Tuesday so no rush yet as the campaign won't ramp up until then

You mentioned things Trump can call on but fact is he is record setting unpopular. He is double digits underwater in the key rust-belt states. He has clearly failed to deliver there. Voters in Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin don't care about supreme court judges or Dow at record levels or the national unemployment figures..if they did Hillary would have walked it as Obama had record setting increases in Dow and huge fall in unemployment.

If Trump had kept the insane rhetoric to a minimum he likely would have won a second term easily as the US economy has been on rise for a decade with no sign of slowing. However he hasn't and that's why he has a major fight on his hands where one shouldn't have existed.

Good points

Kimsang

eagle eye wrote: »

None of those mentioned in the two posts above will beat Trump.
It's a sad state of affairs when the party can't see wood from the trees.
They need to find a centre candidate, a decent, smart man, and all get behind him.

Why would you disregard Biden? To me, it looks like he ticks all those boxes.

eagle eye

Kimsang wrote:

Why would you disregard Biden? To me, it looks like he ticks all those boxes.

Too old, no chance against Trump. If he was 40-55 he would be a good candidate.

Wanderer78

eagle eye wrote:

Too old, no chance against Trump. If he was 40-55 he would be a good candidate.

Oh I think it could come down to trump and biden, we ll know in the coming months

eagle eye

Wanderer78 wrote:

Oh I think it could come down to trump and biden, we ll know in the coming months

Trump will win handily enough if that happens.

Kimsang

I would prefer Trump wins than one of the far-left types. Biden would get my vote. I think a lot of swing voters would think the same.

is_that_so

eagle eye wrote: »

Trump will win handily enough if that happens.

I don't think there'll be anything handy about this one. Biden does bring the swing states into play. The real danger for the Dems is picking someone they love but not enough Americans do and Trump will drive right over them. It's horses for courses time and Biden fits some of that. Warren may too but she should be on the ticket anyway. Keeping Trump off-balance is the trick but pretty hard to do!

Danzy

is_that_so wrote: »

I don't think there'll be anything handy about this one. Biden does bring the swing states into play. The real danger for the Dems is picking someone they love but not enough Americans do and Trump will drive right over them. It's horses for courses time and Biden fits some of that. Warren may too but she should be on the ticket anyway. Keeping Trump off-balance is the trick but pretty hard to do!

Warren should be in any cabinet, he'll, is like to see her in Trump's cabinet.

As a person though she is bland, not an option when up against a larger than life candidate.

Biden has the same challenges.

Rjd2

is_that_so wrote: »

I don't think there'll be anything handy about this one. Biden does bring the swing states into play. The real danger for the Dems is picking someone they love but not enough Americans do and Trump will drive right over them. It's horses for courses time and Biden fits some of that. Warren may too but she should be on the ticket anyway. Keeping Trump off-balance is the trick but pretty hard to do!

How does Trump win the election?

By sneaking the Rust Belt states like he did in 2016.

Who is Most likely to beat him in the rust belt?

Biden as the polls have constantly shown.

How Does Trump win without the rust belt?

He doesn't. There is no other path for him in 2020.

rossie1977

Kimsang wrote: »

I would prefer Trump wins than one of the far-left types. Biden would get my vote. I think a lot of swing voters would think the same.

Nobody on the far left is running..

is_that_so

Rjd2 wrote: »

How does Trump win the election?

By sneaking the Rust Belt states like he did in 2016.

Who is Most likely to beat him in the rust belt?

Biden as the polls have constantly shown.

How Does Trump win without the rust belt?

He doesn't. There is no other path for him in 2020.

Thanks for the bolding teacher! :P Pretty sure I've said that at least once on his thread. The problem is will the Dems spot that? I'm less convinced now than I was. There's a very vocal leftist drive going on inside the Dems at present. That, on the face of it, looks like forcing candidates to place where most of America is not. More importantly though it could deliver the wrong candidate.

is_that_so

rossie1977 wrote: »

Nobody on the far left is running..

Not yet! Candidates often shift to where they imagine the votes to be.

rossie1977

Nobody on the Dem side is going to propose communism, Marxism or anarchism as solutions though. Bernie is easily most left of the candidates and hasn't moved barely from the same political position he has held for over 30 years. Even he is more to the centre than the likes of Gandhi or Mandela politically on many topics and nobody considers Mandela or Gandhi far left.

rossie1977

It's incorrect to say the Dems are forcing candidates to places America as a whole is not. The US is alot more progressive than the Republican party, mainstream media, right wing media or the Democratic leadership would have you believe.

Take this research from 16-17

The Economy
82 percent of Americans think wealthy people have too much power and influence in Washington.
69 percent think large businesses have too much power and influence in Washington.
59 percent—and 72 percent of likely voters—think Wall Street has too much power and influence in Washington.
78 percent of likely voters support stronger rules and enforcement on the financial industry.
65 percent of Americans think our economic system “unfairly favors powerful interests.”
59 percent of Americans—and 43 percent of Republicans—think corporations make “too much profit.”

Inequality
82 percent of Americans think economic inequality is a “very big” (48 percent) or “moderately big” (34 percent) problem. Even 69 percent of Republicans share this view.
66 percent of Americans think money and wealth should be distributed more evenly.
72 percent of Americans say it is “extremely” or “very” important, and 23 percent say it is “somewhat important,” to reduce poverty.
59 percent of registered voters—and 51 percent of Republicans—favor raising the maximum amount that low-wage workers can make and still be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit, from $14,820 to $18,000.

Money in Politics
96 percent of Americans—including 96 percent of Republicans—believe money in politics is to blame for the dysfunction of the U.S. political system.
84 percent of Americans—including 80 percent of Republicans—believe money has too much influence in politics.
78 percent of Americans say we need sweeping new laws to reduce the influence of money in politics.
73 percent of registered voters have an unfavorable opinion of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

Taxes
80 percent of Americans think some corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes.
78 percent think some wealthy people don’t pay their fair share of taxes.
76 percent believe the wealthiest Americans should pay higher taxes.
60 percent of registered voters believe corporations pay too little in taxes.
87 percent of Americans say it is critical to preserve Social Security, even if it means increasing Social Security taxes paid by wealthy Americans.
67 percent of Americans support lifting the cap to require higher-income workers to pay Social Security taxes on all of their wages.

Minimum Wage
66 percent of Americans favor raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour.
59 percent favor raising the federal minimum wage to $12 an hour.
48 percent support raising the national minimum wage to $15 an hour. (A survey of registered voters found that 54 percent favored a $15 minimum wage.)
63 percent of registered voters think the minimum wage should be adjusted each year by the rate of inflation.

Workers’ Rights
61 percent of Americans—including 42 percent of Republicans—approve of labor unions.
74 percent of registered voters—including 71 percent of Republicans—support requiring employers to offer paid parental and medical leave.
78 percent of likely voters favor establishing a national fund that offers all workers 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave.

Health Care
60 percent of Americans believe “it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage.”
60 percent of registered voters favor “expanding Medicare to provide health insurance to every American.”
58 percent of the public favors replacing Obamacare with “a federally funded healthcare program providing insurance for all Americans.”
64 percent of registered voters favor their state accepting the Obamacare plan for expanding Medicaid in their state.

Education
63 percent of registered voters—including 47 percent of Republicans—of Americans favor making four-year public colleges and universities tuition-free.
59 percent of Americans favor free early-childhood education.

Climate Change and the Environment
76 percent of voters are “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about climate change.
68 percent of voters think it is possible to protect the environment and protect jobs.
72 percent of voters think it is a “bad idea” to cut funding for scientific research on the environment and climate change.
59 percent of voters say more needs to be done to address climate change.

Gun Safety
84 percent of Americans support requiring background checks for all gun buyers.
77 percent of gun owners support requiring background checks for all gun buyers.

Criminal Justice
57 percent of Americans believe police officers generally treat blacks and other minorities differently than they treat whites.
60 percent of Americans believe the recent killings of black men by police are part of a broader pattern of how police treat black Americans (compared with 39 percent who believe they are isolated incidents).

Immigration
68 percent of Americans—including 48 percent of Republicans—believe the country’s openness to people from around the world “is essential to who we are as a nation.” Just 29 percent say that “if America is too open to people from all over the world, we risk losing our identity as a nation.”
65 percent of Americans—including 42 percent of Republicans—say immigrants strengthen the country “because of their hard work and talents.” Just 26 percent say immigrants are a burden “because they take our jobs, housing and health care.”
64 percent of Americans think an increasing number of people from different races, ethnic groups, and nationalities makes the country a better place to live. Only 5 percent say it makes the United States a worse place to live, and 29 percent say it makes no difference.
76 percent of registered voters—including 69 percent of Republicans—support allowing undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children (Dreamers) to stay in the country. 58 percent think Dreamers should be allowed to stay and become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Another 18 percent think they should be allowed to stay and become legal residents, but not citizens. Only 15 percent think they should be removed or deported from the country.

Abortion and Women’s Health
58 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
68 percent of Americans—including 54 percent of Republicans—support the requirement for private health insurance plans to cover the full cost of birth control.

Same-Sex Marriage
62 percent of Americans—including 70 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans—support same-sex marriage.
74 percent of millennials (born after 1981) support same-sex marriage.

Rjd2

https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/1150875743007719424

NH poll. Good reading for Harris for sure.

The biggest story for me is Williamson a candidate derided by many on all political sides is ahead of established candidates like Beto, Gillibrand, Tusli and the biggest flop of the campaign Beto.


That's a breakdown of how a lot of candidates are doing regarding money generated, bar the front runners its pretty grim reading for everyone.

Going to be some drop outs soon.

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/president/democratic-primary/candidates/fundraising-and-campaign-finance-tracker/

pixelburp

Beto O'Rourke got greedy, and started believing his own hype way, way too much; he was always much better off consolidating his solid campaign in Texas and running again (is that up for election in 2020?).

IMO, he's a cautionary tale about how a good Social Media presence, while important in modern times, is NOT the be all and end all.

For me the talking point is Sanders: sure it's early doors but the manner in which his campaign has stalled so soon must surely worry his campaign staff. He seems to have singularly failed to build on the name recognition and goodwill generated from 2016. Like I said it's very early in the campaign, but even so, he'll want to arrest that decline and soon.

peddlelies

Totally agree with the above sentiment. I doubt O'Rourke will get as close as he did if he challenges Cruz again. He comes across to me as a bluffing frat boy trying to be as "woke" as possible. It's good to see in the general people see through it.

I thought Harris might end up falling into a similar category but she's proven me wrong. Probably the favourite now for a lot of people.

marno21

pixelburp wrote: »

Beto O'Rourke got greedy, and started believing his own hype way, way too much; he was always much better off consolidating his solid campaign in Texas and running again (is that up for election in 2020?).

IMO, he's a cautionary tale about how a good Social Media presence, while important in modern times, is NOT the be all and end all.

For me the talking point is Sanders: sure it's early doors but the manner in which his campaign has stalled so soon must surely worry his campaign staff. He seems to have singularly failed to build on the name recognition and goodwill generated from 2016. Like I said it's very early in the campaign, but even so, he'll want to arrest that decline and soon.

Yes, John Cornyn's seat is up for grabs in 2020.

Beto trying to run for this seat, building on his showing vs Ted Cruz in 2018 would have been far more beneficial for the DNC than what's he's doing now.

Re: Sanders. The policy positions that made him stand out in 2016 and before that are being taken on by so many candidates now, and with him simply standing on the same positions as 2016, it's making him look less fresh imo and a bit diluted by the spreading of his ideas. But then again the primaries are so far away it's hard to call anything.

is_that_so

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Politics1com/status/1150875743007719424

NH poll. Good reading for Harris for sure.

The biggest story for me is Williamson a candidate derided by many on all political sides is ahead of established candidates like Beto, Gillibrand, Tusli and the biggest flop of the campaign Beto.


That's a breakdown of how a lot of candidates are doing regarding money generated, bar the front runners its pretty grim reading for everyone.

Going to be some drop outs soon.

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/president/democratic-primary/candidates/fundraising-and-campaign-finance-tracker/

From the Dems perspective anyone below Sanders calling it a day now would be a relief.

Quin_Dub

marno21 wrote: »

Yes, John Cornyn's seat is up for grabs in 2020.

Beto trying to run for this seat, building on his showing vs Ted Cruz in 2018 would have been far more beneficial for the DNC than what's he's doing now.

Re: Sanders. The policy positions that made him stand out in 2016 and before that are being taken on by so many candidates now, and with him simply standing on the same positions as 2016, it's making him look less fresh imo and a bit diluted by the spreading of his ideas. But then again the primaries are so far away it's hard to call anything.

This applies to the majority of the current candidates - They'd have been better off and far more impactful to the overall status quo taking their profile/status and challenging for senate seats.

Winning the Senate is arguably more important than taking POTUS in terms of the long haul.

If someone beats Trump but McConnell still runs the Senate , will it have mattered??

Rjd2

I think the term white privilege is overused way to much,,,but Beto losing a senate race to a deeply unpopular Ted Cruz and then deciding to run as president is the term personified.

I think he overestimated his own appeal in that race v Cruz and how the media went to bat for him. He was never going to get such favorable media coverage this time round nor someone as loathsome as Cruz as an opponent.

I dunno who his base was, at times he tried to play to progressives, but they were wary of his voting record and the centrists of the party had Biden and Mayor Pete to rally behind.

Running for senate again was the sensible play, but alas not to be.