US Presidential Election 2020

4068ac1elhodqr · 11-03-2019 10:45PM

Yang is trending again, must have got some more media exposure about the free monthly $1,000 for everyone in the audience.

The 66/1 prices have all gone, as low as 29-34/1.
This could get interesting.

Larbre34 · 13-03-2019 12:02AM

Biden hinted heavily to a firefighters representative forum today, that he will announce in a few weeks.

Biden-Harris 2020, mark my words.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta · 13-03-2019 01:22PM

IMO Gillibrand is done and dusted now from this sexual harassment scandal; she'd be just throwing money away I think if she continued her campaign at this stage. Very early in the cycle, I know, so it could go away but I'm not sure her handling of it (then and now) wouldn't come back to haunt her 'bigly' in the Dem primary debates.

pixelburp · 13-03-2019 01:34PM

Larbre34 wrote: »

Biden hinted heavily to a firefighters representative forum today, that he will announce in a few weeks.

Biden-Harris 2020, mark my words.

I'm increasingly of the belief that a Biden ticket will guarantee Trump gets reelected; it may be terribly entertaining to watch him tear Trump apart, but I don't believe the progressives will row behind him.

Plus he has too much baggage, and has put his foot in it enough times that the Republicans will absolutely go to town on him. The GOP have already shown themselves to be nakedly hypocritical when it comes to their president's own gaffs and moral failings so I absolutely expect them to attack Biden with these angles.

Quin_Dub · 13-03-2019 01:42PM

pixelburp wrote: »

I'm increasingly of the belief that a Biden ticket will guarantee Trump gets reelected; it may be terribly entertaining to watch him tear Trump apart, but I don't believe the progressives will row behind him.

Plus he has too much baggage, and has put his foot in it enough times that the Republicans will absolutely go to town on him. The GOP have already shown themselves to be nakedly hypocritical when it comes to their president's own gaffs and moral failings so I absolutely expect them to attack Biden with these angles.

This is the single biggest problem the Democrats have right now.

GOP voters are Party 1st and then candidate a very very distant second.

Dem voters are far more focused on the Candidate and their alignment to their specific political positions and if they don't get that alignment they simply don't turn up on polling day.

This attitude, above all else is the barrier to the Democrats winning the Senate and the WH in 2020.

They need to work out a way of fixing this before the elections and that probably requires every single one of the candidates (and every other Dem "voice" - Thinking AOC and a few others here) to publicly,loudly and repeatedly declare their support for whoever wins.

It also means keeping the Primary race pretty clean.

MadYaker · 13-03-2019 01:56PM

I don't think the race needs to be super clean but they need to show a united front behind their candidate afterwards. The party need to do this and they need to find a way to unite the voters too. THe primary needs to be fair and open too, hopefully they learned their lesson last time when they shafted Sanders and then lost the election, he probably would have beaten Trump.

4068ac1elhodqr · 13-03-2019 03:07PM

Mr Yang is yer only man, with a plan.
Still going steady short on the markets.

His only negative, is that he's a bit too forward thinking.

Hasn't Biden got a bit of a 'creepy factor' about him?
Meanwhile Sanders has the 'old grumpy man' factor.

spacecoyote · 13-03-2019 04:09PM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This is the single biggest problem the Democrats have right now.

GOP voters are Party 1st and then candidate a very very distant second.

Dem voters are far more focused on the Candidate and their alignment to their specific political positions and if they don't get that alignment they simply don't turn up on polling day.

This attitude, above all else is the barrier to the Democrats winning the Senate and the WH in 2020.

They need to work out a way of fixing this before the elections and that probably requires every single one of the candidates (and every other Dem "voice" - Thinking AOC and a few others here) to publicly,loudly and repeatedly declare their support for whoever wins.

It also means keeping the Primary race pretty clean.

Polls would say that there is a bit of a shift in the Dems attitudes on this front currently though (according to 538, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-care-more-about-winning-than-usual/)

Per the article, whilst not as concrete as the Rep attitude, Dems seem to be more focussed on candidates that will beat Trump, than how it aligns with their beliefs (though it doesn't appear to have shifted enormously)

Manic Moran · 13-03-2019 05:34PM

spacecoyote wrote: »

Polls would say that there is a bit of a shift in the Dems attitudes on this front currently though (according to 538, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-care-more-about-winning-than-usual/)

Per the article, whilst not as concrete as the Rep attitude, Dems seem to be more focussed on candidates that will beat Trump, than how it aligns with their beliefs (though it doesn't appear to have shifted enormously)

It still will only help so much, though...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/04/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-democratic-party-ideology/index.html

53% of Democrats consider themselves liberal. 47% say they are moderate or conservative.

The real question then is not which part of the party is on the rise -- it's the AOC/Bernie Sanders wing for sure -- but rather how those moderates and conservatives are treated by the liberals in the party. Will they be driven out as insufficiently loyal to the cause -- as tea party (and Trump) Republicans have done to their own centrist wing over the last decade? Or will liberals find a way to incorporate the views of their more moderate party members as they try to find a candidate who can oust President Donald Trump in 2020?

Again, Anzalone hits the nail on the head. "My main gripe about AOC is that while I respect her voice in the party, I don't think she respects mine or anyone else's who differs with her on policy or comes from a different political electoral reality," he tweeted.

The first problem may not be as much what happens on polling day, but what happens in the year leading up to it. It's all very well thinking that a Democrat voter will vote for the D whoever it is, they very well may do so, but if they feel that they have been ostracised from the party and no longer are Ds, will they do the same thing?

The second problem remains as ever... There are, as the chap above says, two different electoral realities which Democrats come from. The solid progressive of the coasts, and the swing-state moderates. The Democrat strength and nomination votes comes from those coasts, but the election votes come from those swing states... Two years ago, the Republicans won on the basis of those swing votes, a few months ago the Democrats won on the basis of those swing votes. Already the pundits are talking about a swing of seats back to the Republicans in 2020: The 2018 protest vote against Trump will transfer to the Presidential ticket, when they can vote against Trump directly. For congress, the voters can go back to the questions of party policy and their local candidate.

rossie1977 · 14-03-2019 12:22AM

Republicans and right wing media did a great job of painting Hillary Clinton as biggest monster on Earth during run up to last election so that became unifying force upon which they all gathered around. Remember the Republican party were in total chaos as late as the national convention with protests and scuffles breaking out on the floor.

Big problem for Dems is there is no television network like Fox that will put their weight behind a Democratic candidate. CNN, MSNBC would likely rather another 4 years of Trump as it's good business for them and will again air his empty podium instead of focusing on the Dem candidates.

As for what states are progressive and which are not it's not a case of costal states being progressive while Midwestern ones aren't. It's more a urban/rural divide. Rural California has some of the most conservative areas in the country. Rural NY State is extremely conservative. Philly and Pittsburgh are progressive but the rest of Pennsylvania is very conservative. Last Senate election a progressive candidate in O'Rourke won every major urban area in Texas yet lost election because he barely won anything outside the likes of Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Corpus Christi and the South Western part of the state.

Manic Moran · 14-03-2019 05:41AM

rossie1977 wrote: »

As for what states are progressive and which are not it's not a case of costal states being progressive while Midwestern ones aren't. It's more a urban/rural divide. Rural California has some of the most conservative areas in the country. Rural NY State is extremely conservative. Philly and Pittsburgh are progressive but the rest of Pennsylvania is very conservative. Last Senate election a progressive candidate in O'Rourke won every major urban area in Texas yet lost election because he barely won anything outside the likes of Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Corpus Christi and the South Western part of the state.

This is all true, but the States tend not to worry about that in their external facing. California gets 55 votes. The fact that San Bernadino or Amador counties may be solidly red is somewhat irrelevant when there are sufficient democrats in the State to all but guarantee those 55 votes for the D candidate. Those swing states tend to be the ones where urban and rural populations are about equal, and the swing voters tend to be the interface between those two populations: The suburbs.

circadian · 14-03-2019 09:15AM

I like Yang and his interviews are good. He's very straight and candid about his ideas and positions but at the same time he said he "doesn't give a ****" if he gets the nomination he just wants to force the agenda in the general direction of the universal income. I can see Bernie picking up some of Yang's campaign ideas should he drop out.

pixelburp · 14-03-2019 11:50AM

Well, Beto O'Rourke has officially announced his candidature.

Honestly I know little of him except for that close Senate run and his apparent canny social media presence.

Rjd2 · 14-03-2019 01:27PM

pixelburp wrote: »

Well, Beto O'Rourke has officially announced his candidature.

Honestly I know little of him except for that close Senate run and his apparent canny social media presence.

It will be interesting to see how he does. His supporters will point to how he pushed Cruz while his detractors will point to how he lost the one of the least popular politicians in America. His fundraising was very impressive v Cruz, but lets see how he does in the primary when he doesn't have a hate figure to focus on. He may not be left wing enough for the Bernie brigade and Biden will occupy the centre whenever he decides to run.

Also agreed Yang has been great and some will definitely try to copy his ideas which is a good thing for sure.

AlmightyCushion · 14-03-2019 01:45PM

Misael Bewildered Sobriety wrote: »

Somewhat agree, it's still a brave, unique and interesting offer all the same. And a tastey offer, $1,000 bucks (per month) in the wallet, for nothing.

Bernie is doing well with the trending, he's got a fresh 4yr batch of millennials to entertain, all keen on the ideals of universal health, equality, wages etc but at the same time not keen paying taxes for all this.

Beto is another wild card, maybe they need a 3+party race to make things more interesting across the great divide.

Has he given any indication as to how he will afford the UBI. There's about 250m adults in the US. So UBI would cost about $250 billion a month or $3T a year. The US budget deficit is about $1T at the moment. Sure, a decent chunk of that $3T will come back in taxes but it's still going to cost a shít ton of money.

4068ac1elhodqr · 14-03-2019 03:00PM

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Has he given any indication as to how he will afford the UBI. There's about 250m adults in the US. So UBI would cost about $250 billion a month or $3T a year. The US budget deficit is about $1T at the moment. Sure, a decent chunk of that $3T will come back in taxes but it's still going to cost a shít ton of money.

Yes and they already have 14-21$tr of Nat Debt.

You also have to write off all/any welfare payments, as this UBI would replace them all. Much of the expense will be returned in taxes through spending, only very few will squirrel away this 1k pm.

Read somewhere 75% of their public are living month-to-month, so another 1,000pm on top of low wages would be a handy cash injection and huge psychological stimulus - rolling into enterprise or education.

Obvious risks are effects on Fx or inflation.

Anyhow, Yang is up from nowhere, to 6th favourite for POTUS overtaking the likes of Gillibrand thanks only to GenZ, who are better aware of the 4thIR, and #YangGang movement, although rarely given a platform on the mainstream media.

“All you need is self-driving cars to destabilize society,” ...adding that, in a few years, “we’re going to have a million truck drivers out of work who are 94 percent male, with an average level of education of high school or one year of college … And we’re about to do the same thing to retail workers, call center workers, fast-food workers, insurance companies, accounting firms.” He believes UBI is the best solution to this.

MadYaker · 14-03-2019 08:33PM

Rjd2 wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how he does. His supporters will point to how he pushed Cruz while his detractors will point to how he lost the one of the least popular politicians in America. His fundraising was very impressive v Cruz, but lets see how he does in the primary when he doesn't have a hate figure to focus on. He may not be left wing enough for the Bernie brigade and Biden will occupy the centre whenever he decides to run.

Also agreed Yang has been great and some will definitely try to copy his ideas which is a good thing for sure.

He may be unpopular on a national level but Texas is a deeply red state and it was a state election so I think it's pretty easy to see how Beto lost. He was a very strong candidate but it seemed a good indication that Texas may be slowly turning blue.

Rjd2 · 15-03-2019 10:05PM

The backlash from the progressives and mainly the Bernie base to Beto has been savage. If it comes to those 2 in the end, holy ****ing ****.

Rjd2 · 15-03-2019 10:11PM

https://twitter.com/MatthewSitman/status/1106195059047845889

Its true, Warren actually coming up with some interesting stuff recently, but her campaign is dead and Beto stealing the spotlight does not help.

Ultros · 15-03-2019 10:46PM

Warren was idiotic to release that Indian heritage vid trying to defend herself. Posters here argued she never used it to forward her career even though a subsequent news story by WaPo showed she did, so I suppose she's capable of fooling some people.

Assuming Trump is running, Biden will be the nominee imo and he will beat Trump. He's centrist and a reassuring calming presence to the current divisiveness.

Trump will fixate on those "creepy" Joe Biden vids if things go badly for him, it won't be enough. I don't see it being too different to 2016 although the final results electoral votes wise will be reversed.

pixelburp · 16-03-2019 08:11PM

Rjd2 wrote: »

Its true, Warren actually coming up with some interesting stuff recently, but her campaign is dead and Beto stealing the spotlight does not help.

I don't get the impression O'Rourke is winning a lot of hearts & minds so far; what little I've seen and heard of him since the announcement has seemed awfully presumptuous and entitled, and narratives in some media have pounced on this.

His prominence has been down to some endearing social media and being a charming presence in comparison with Ted Cruz. I have a feeling he'll cut an isolated figure once the veneer of the 'fun' candidate is stripped away and any political inconsistencies come to light.

16-03-2019 08:16PM

MadYaker wrote: »

He may be unpopular on a national level but Texas is a deeply red state and it was a state election so I think it's pretty easy to see how Beto lost. He was a very strong candidate but it seemed a good indication that Texas may be slowly turning blue.

Haven't been keeping track of this thread, but Texas's blue turn isn't its native population.. It's a lot of people from Democrat country moving there. Sure there may be a younger generation etc. but apparently, the turn is due to new people. Open to correction.

Gbear · 16-03-2019 08:54PM

Presumably Beto isn't up to anything else, having lost the Senate election, but raising his profile could well serve him in the future. I can't imagine he's particularly fussed about getting the nomination.

Rjd2 · 17-03-2019 11:17PM

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1106952515793403909

Tulsi is not perfect whatsoever and if I were her friend I would have strongly urged her not to run and her campaign seems dead, but its refreshing to see someone actually ask some difficult questions of the Dem establishment especially majority of the Resist grifters who for the most case are just as slimy and biased as the MAGA ****wits on the other side.

Her, Yang and Warren the most interesting candidates so far for me especially compared to the more tedious establishment shower whose message seems to be "I like good things, but hate bad things" and little else.

Gbear · 18-03-2019 12:59PM

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1106952515793403909

Tulsi is not perfect whatsoever and if I were her friend I would have strongly urged her not to run and her campaign seems dead, but its refreshing to see someone actually ask some difficult questions of the Dem establishment especially majority of the Resist grifters who for the most case are just as slimy and biased as the MAGA ****wits on the other side.

Her, Yang and Warren the most interesting candidates so far for me especially compared to the more tedious establishment shower whose message seems to be "I like good things, but hate bad things" and little else.

Her point kinda seems like bollocks though.

If Trump hadn't been acting exactly the way you'd expect someone in Putin's pocket to act, there would be far less concern that he is compromised.
His failures in foreign policy with powers with whom he has alleged financial ties is precisely the problem.

Putin can freely proliferate weapons precisely because there is no credible presence in the White House to check him, and the Trump White house want to proliferate weapons because Trump aspires to be a fascist strongman and John Bolton is a warmongering psychopath.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the Democrats. This just paints Gabbard as a con artist trying to run "both sides" nonsense.

Manic Moran · 18-03-2019 03:44PM

I’m more curious as to how she would prefer Trump to act with reference to Russia. Is she saying that she would have preferred a position less in opposition to what Russia is up to? I mean, Ok, Trump is no diplomatic genius, but I don’t see anything wrong with the current policy of putting US troops in Poland or the Baltic countries, which annoys Russia. They are our friends and want reassurance.

Sonny678 · 18-03-2019 04:23PM

Gbear wrote:

Presumably Beto isn't up to anything else, having lost the Senate election, but raising his profile could well serve him in the future. I can't imagine he's particularly fussed about getting the nomination.

He did extremely well in Texas. While demographics are changing in Texas with migration to the state. It still is a huge red state. Seen as one of the strongest republican states in the country. Cruz might be unpopular but a democrat in Texas is much more unpopular overall. His performance in Texas was very impressive. He is an interesting candidate but very inexperienced .

He has been compared to RFK. You can see the comparsion in terms of he looks a bit like RFK . And this matters in the US on the democrat side. Clinton and both Obama even Jimmy Carter were all compared to JFK. Since the 60s Americans have been looking for a candidate in the JFk mode. Young forties handsome articulate with young family , who talks about hope and American dream. It might seem odd here. To be sucessful democrat if ur compared to JFk this is what Democrats are always looking for a new JFK. And O Rourke was continuely compared to RFK. Probaly the more talented kennedy brother.

And I definitely feel Democrats are always looking for another kennedy and the Americans also in general like this type of candiate. Look at the West Wing the TV programme. The President in the programme wud be an idealised version of US President. The US president Americans wud have liked in real life more then W Bush. The time the show was on air. Barlet the US President in the show who was he modelled on , an older maturer version of JFK. Martin Sheen even acted JFK in an earlier film.

That idea of young articlulate forty something giving hope and talking aspiration is a powerful candidate in the US. Everywhere there is alway search for this sort of candidate. Blair when he was first elected in Uk , Trudeau in Canada and Macron in France are all similar candiates. All of them were compared to JFK before their winning elections. They might have all failed to live up to the hype. But I definitely feel in America and other western powers that JFk sort of candidate is want people look for on the liberal/ left leaning side. And it is candidate that can be very sucessful candidate. It all goes back to kennedy. The first real modern media tv president. The problem is nearly all these candiates never live up to the hype and hope and promises they make in elections eg Clinton Obama Trudeau Macron Blair. So I see O Rourke as type of candidate more compared to RFK then JFK. But that is a sort of candidate is always popular agmost democrats. I think if ur compared to kennedys it helps. If that makes sense.

Gbear · 18-03-2019 05:00PM

Sonny678 wrote: »

He did extremely well in Texas. While demographics are changing in Texas with migration to the state. It still is a huge red state. Seen as one of the strongest republican states in the country. Cruz might be unpopular but a democrat in Texas is much more unpopular overall. His performance in Texas was very impressive. He is an interesting candidate but very inexperienced .

[...]

The problem is nearly all these candiates never live up to the hype and hope and promises they make in elections eg Clinton Obama Trudeau Macron Blair. So I see O Rourke as type of candidate more compared to RFK then JFK. But that is a sort of candidate is always popular agmost democrats. I think if ur compared to kennedys it helps. If that makes sense.

Even JFK didn't really live up to JFK from what came out later. The ideal of him is always going to leave a candidate on a hiding to nothing.

Beto has exploded with a $6m+ opening 24 hours of donations, so it certainly suggests he's very much a credible candidate at this early stage.
The Republicans are trying to head him off with some accusations about attempting to flee the scene of a crime following a DUI, but it was 20 years ago and I really doubt that he has much to worry about on the scandal front if that's the worst skeleton in his closet.

eagle eye · 18-03-2019 06:08PM

I think Beto fits the bill needs nicely. I think he would have a great chance of defeating Trump.

Rjd2 · 18-03-2019 09:24PM

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/1107636695091040256

Some solid tweets there about Beto. The Bernie brigade may call Beto an Obama clone, for many fed up with the madness of the last few years that's not the insult they may think.

B

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments