US Presidential Election 2020

pixelburp · 16-07-2019 3:02pm

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.

You'd have to wonder if the DNC or someone else in high authority might start having words in the ears of these Presidential candidates milling around the 1-2 percentage points; if O'Rourke has a chance of turning Texas blue, that has to be a Democratic priority and the sooner he drops out the longer he has to fundraise and focus on that Senate seat. Though perhaps recent events might end up taking his shine in any future campaign.

You're probably right about Sanders; as you say his policies are not particularly unique in the field anymore. Plus, I hate to say it, he is looking his age a lot more than in 2016. At a few recent public appearances he looked tired and hunched. I like the guy's temperament and policies, but perhaps he too needs to step back.

marno21 · 16-07-2019 3:04pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

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??

Agree with you fully. But I would emphasise Beto in there given that Texas is becoming more and more blue and he could have managed to build on his successes in 2018.

There are a number of Senate seats that could be flipped in 2020. Texas as above, Colorado, Arizona, Iowa, Maine, North Carolina + who knows who'll be the Republican candidate in Alamaba. Democrats could retain that if Roy Moore rears his head again.

Luxxis · 16-07-2019 3:43pm

Kimsang wrote: »

Its amazing how resolute you are in your accusation of me, while at the same time stating that solar is the cheapest form of energy, and nuclear power stations are incredibly expensive. Not just unfounded, but ludicrous.

Just goes to show the partisanship.

Overall operating costs of nuclear is about the same as fossil fuels. Capex and Opex combined is whats its really about.

On a side note we should have nuclear power stations.

Limpy · 16-07-2019 3:55pm

Before being anti war would get you a good chance off getting elected. Trump flipped pretty quick from the tweets criticising Obama RE Syria ect.

Would Sanders who would prefer troops to return from the Middle East flip also?.

Rjd2 · 16-07-2019 5:01pm

Limpy wrote: »

Before being anti war would get you a good chance off getting elected. Trump flipped pretty quick from the tweets criticising Obama RE Syria ect.

Would Sanders who would prefer troops to return from the Middle East flip also?.

Gabbard is the strongest when it comes to that and she her polling around 1%.

She was the strongest when Trump etc tried to do a coup in Venezuela while the rest were very slow to condemn Trump.

Hande hoche! · 16-07-2019 5:14pm

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/

That's an interesting poll. If Biden has another dreadful debate, could see that gap narrowing further. Curious as to whether Mayor Pete can maintain his momentum.

FreudianSlippers · 17-07-2019 10:14am

pixelburp wrote: »

You'd have to wonder if the DNC or someone else in high authority might start having words in the ears of these Presidential candidates milling around the 1-2 percentage points; if O'Rourke has a chance of turning Texas blue, that has to be a Democratic priority and the sooner he drops out the longer he has to fundraise and focus on that Senate seat. Though perhaps recent events might end up taking his shine in any future campaign.

You're probably right about Sanders; as you say his policies are not particularly unique in the field anymore. Plus, I hate to say it, he is looking his age a lot more than in 2016. At a few recent public appearances he looked tired and hunched. I like the guy's temperament and policies, but perhaps he too needs to step back.

The longer Beto is in the public eye the better in terms of fundraising for his next Senate run. I do agree, however, that unlike some of the others who are clearly hanging on for an eventual White House position, Beto is in it for a different reason.

is_that_so · 17-07-2019 10:26am

Hande hoche! wrote: »

That's an interesting poll. If Biden has another dreadful debate, could see that gap narrowing further. Curious as to whether Mayor Pete can maintain his momentum.

Once the deadwood clears out it should change the dynamic of the campaign. I think the remaining candidates also need to be mindful of a need to be attractive to US voters in general.

rossie1977 · 17-07-2019 12:22pm

More like appealing to voters in a handful of states.

Regardless who wins the Dem nomination the map will likely end up like this. Obviously NH, Nevada might go red if a certain candidate is choosen or North Carolina blue if Dem candidate appeals to the like Obama.

But overall I don't see much change there. Trump's not winning northeast, Illinois, Pacific coast, Hawaii regardless who the opponent and no Dem is winning anything in Bible belt, Great Plains or Alaska.

pixelburp · 19-07-2019 5:12pm

https://www.axios.com/john-delaney-2020-presidential-campaign-drop-out-44634be2-0973-403b-aca0-55278a9c37da.html

When your own staffers are asking you to quit, then perhaps the writing's on the wall.

Most remarkable is the fact Delaney has been running for President for approx. 2 years, spending $19 million. All for what? 1-2% of polling. At this stage he's a walking Sunk Cost Fallacy.

marno21 · 19-07-2019 7:50pm

pixelburp wrote: »

https://www.axios.com/john-delaney-2020-presidential-campaign-drop-out-44634be2-0973-403b-aca0-55278a9c37da.html

When your own staffers are asking you to quit, then perhaps the writing's on the wall.

Most remarkable is the fact Delaney has been running for President for approx. 2 years, spending $19 million. All for what? 1-2% of polling. At this stage he's a walking Sunk Cost Fallacy.

There was a good summary in the Washington Post also yesterday now that the second quarter filings are in.

It's looking increasingly likely it's going to be one of Biden/Sanders/Harris/Buttigieg/Warren and the sooner the rest start to accept this the better for everyone.

Another debate of 20 people is benefiting nobody. There are some important Senate races in addition to the WH one and some of the also rans from swing states may be better off focusing on them (Beto and Hickenlooper for two).

eagle eye · 19-07-2019 7:58pm

marno21 wrote:

It's looking increasingly likely it's going to be one of Biden/Sanders/Harris/Buttigieg/Warren and the sooner the rest start to accept this the better for everyone.

They may as well put nobody forward if one of those is going to get the nomination because none of them has any hope of beating Trump.
Surely there is somebody better who can still be put forward?

4068ac1elhodqr · 19-07-2019 8:06pm

eagle eye wrote: »

They may as well put nobody forward if one of those is going to get the nomination because none of them has any hope of beating Trump.
Surely there is somebody better who can still be put forward?

Agree with this, DT is as short as ever to win again, as low as 1.75.

The best 'voter offer' exists with 6th fav for DM. I.e. Mr Yang - who wants to give everyone 1k per month for free, what's not to like?

Assume he isn't being given a platform as the old hands such as Biden want to run rather than some clever newcomer with their fancy new ideas.

rossie1977 · 19-07-2019 8:51pm

Trump is actually trailing generic Democrat in Presidential odds not leading.

Generic Democrat is 4/5 to win in 2020, Republican evens on paddy power

Danzy · 19-07-2019 9:09pm

No hopers might hang on on the chance they get a few delegates, use them as bargaining chips.

Might get a few more %, back someone who'll get the nomination and use that as leverage, be given a nice job.

Rjd2 · 19-07-2019 11:43pm

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/how-trump-could-lose-5-million-votes-still-win-2020-n1031601

https://twitter.com/CharlesFLehman/status/1152291760455991297

Hes right isn't he? That's the flaw possibly with Harris,,,can she win the EC?

Yep Trump is a shabby opponent but the above is a reminder to those who want Biden and Sanders gone aka the two most likely people to win those states,,,careful what you wish for.

Rjd2 · 20-07-2019 12:30am

rossie1977 wrote: »

Trump is actually trailing generic Democrat in Presidential odds not leading.

Generic Democrat is 4/5 to win in 2020, Republican evens on paddy power

Trump is an awful betting price. I have it 65/35 in fav of the dems which would make Trump 2/1 or so. Obviously he has a reasonable chance to win, but if you sit down and work out the betting prices of the states he has to win to get it done with the EC ,,I can safely say it comes out as a bigger accumulator price than EVS.

Basically for me he should be similar price as Liverpool are to win the Premier league.:p

Danzy · 20-07-2019 12:59am

Anxious Democratic Governors Urge 2020 Field Not to Veer Too Far Left

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/19/us/politics/election-2020-democrats.html

eagle eye · 20-07-2019 8:41am

Danzy wrote:

Anxious Democratic Governors Urge 2020 Field Not to Veer Too Far Left

Finally a bit of cop on seeping through.

marno21 · 20-07-2019 12:40pm

A good piece from Colbert King in today's Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-must-support-each-other-before-its-too-late/2019/07/19/dc142840-a99e-11e9-86dd-d7f0e60391e9_story.html

A couple of key points, aside from the main one that the Democrats need to focus on the end goal and not on each other

* The plethora of Democrats running for President are burning through cash fighting unwinnable battles against each other that could be put to much better use
* There are three very winnable Senate races, against Susan Collins in Maine, Thom Tillis in North Carolina and Cory Gardner in Colorado that they could really do with focusing on (there's lots of time yet obviously)
* McConnell and Graham are both up for reelection in 2020. They will likely be reelected but they should not win without a fight. Given the levels they are willing to stoop to the Democrat challenger should be more than willing to drive alongside them on the low road

Rjd2 · 20-07-2019 1:57pm

Collins favorability in Maine in March was 62/37 (+25) and she cruised it in her last few races. Despite Trumps low popularity in Maine, Collins will hold comfortably in 2020. I think the Dems are better of spending money elsewhere tbh.

pixelburp · 20-07-2019 1:59pm

The recent racism from Trump may have had the side effect of galvanising the democrats;, it's easy to forget but technically AOC and Pelosi started the war, before Trump waded in and made things worse all round. It arguably put things in perspective and unified the Dems in a way hitherto absent. Next steps would be to cull the herd of candidates.

marno21 · 20-07-2019 2:20pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

Collins favorability in Maine in March was 62/37 (+25) and she cruised it in her last few races. Despite Trumps low popularity in Maine, Collins will hold comfortably in 2020. I think the Dems are better of spending money elsewhere tbh.

Indeed but her approval rating is diving in Maine. Her normally moderate stance which commanded the vote she got is gone out the window

https://twitter.com/steventdennis/status/1151690352505606144

To me it seems a moderate Democrat (a centrist character) could take that seat given the time left to run, especially if Trump continues his veer to the right

The Phantom Jipper · 20-07-2019 2:22pm

Rjd2 wrote: »

Collins favorability in Maine in March was 62/37 (+25) and she cruised it in her last few races. Despite Trumps low popularity in Maine, Collins will hold comfortably in 2020. I think the Dems are better of spending money elsewhere tbh.

There have been new polls since then, her approval rating is now negative apparently. Fivethirtyeight have an article currently on the site titled "Mitch McConnell is the only Senator more unpopular than Susan Collins".

BluePlanet · 20-07-2019 3:53pm

It should be a right challenge to manage to lose to Trump.
However if the DNC select another corporate Dem (Biden i'm looking at you), turn out will be suppressed and the twitter-in-chief might just sneak back in.

FartyBlartFast · 20-07-2019 6:23pm

People also need to take into account the fact that the republican party are going out of their way to open their elections up to interference again.

Following an election that was shown to be meddled with, why would the republican party - who claim to be obsessed with protecting elections from fraud - be so determined to kill all of the bills that have come to them in the last few years, that were designed to protect these elections?

The obvious answer being, they don't want fair elections. Otherwise how would they continue to go about committing election fraud like they have been doing in places like North Carolina and beyond?

That, in my opinion, is Trumps single biggest advantage going into 2020,and is something he will be looking to capitalise on.

eagle eye · 20-07-2019 6:53pm

BluePlanet wrote:

It should be a right challenge to manage to lose to Trump. However if the DNC select another corporate Dem (Biden i'm looking at you), turn out will be suppressed and the twitter-in-chief might just sneak back in.

The four main candidates at this stage won't bring out the voters to defeat Trump.
It's hard to beat an incumbent, nothing easy about beating one.

batgoat · 20-07-2019 7:15pm

eagle eye wrote: »

The four main candidates at this stage won't bring out the voters to defeat Trump.
It's hard to beat an incumbent, nothing easy about beating one.

While I agree not easy, he's also one of the most controversial presidents that the US have had in their history. So it's more likely to have people come out to vote as a result.

eagle eye · 20-07-2019 7:18pm

batgoat wrote:

While I agree not easy, he's also one of the most controversial presidents that the US have had in their history. So it's more likely to have people come out to vote as a result.

No, they aren't coming out to vote for somebody they don't like. Not be of these four excite people enough.
The Saunders of four years ago might have had a chance but his message is the same and it's old now.

StringerBell · 20-07-2019 8:50pm

I think Warren has a shot among others.

Why do you feel none of them will get enough of the voters out? There is always, always the possibility with Democrats that they will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, its kind of their thing. At this point though surely everybody opposed to Trump, everybody who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Clinton last time, every protest vote for a pointless third candidate will this time be out in force, even if they need to do the old Republican "hold your nose and vote" for "your teams" candidate?

There is no point in looking back at historical patterns with Trump, its unchartered territory. Once a candidate is picked by the Dems I am expecting them to be fully united by the goal of getting that man out of office, even the "radicals" such as AOC have confirmed as much. She has her preferences, but whoever the nominee is will get her backing.

I think Beto needs to drop out in the next few weeks now and turn his attention to that Senate seat, the Senate is just as, if not more important than taking the WH (Assuming they hold the House)

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments