Election 2020

[Teenwolf]

Latest general election polls show why it's important for Biden to win the nomination over Bernie. And if he adds Harris as VP, that's a formidable tandem.

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	Emerson	Biden 26, Sanders 26, Harris 12, O'Rourke 11, Warren 8, Booker 3, Klobuchar 1, Buttigieg 3, Hickenlooper 1, Castro 1, Inslee 1, Gillibrand 0


General Election: Trump vs. Biden	Emerson	Biden 55, Trump 45	Biden +10
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	Emerson	Sanders 51, Trump 49	Sanders +2
General Election: Trump vs. Harris	Emerson	Harris 52, Trump 48	Harris +4
General Election: Trump vs. O'Rourke	Emerson	Trump 51, O'Rourke 49	Trump +2
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	Emerson	Warren 51, Trump 49	Warren +2
General Election: Trump vs. Biden vs. Schultz	Emerson	Biden 52, Trump 44, Schultz 4	Biden +8
General Election: Trump vs. O'Rourke vs. Schultz	Emerson	Trump 46, O'Rourke 44, Schultz 10	Trump +2

Another possible takeaway, if Bernie does win the nomination, he will need a lot of the never-Bernie voters to get behind him, like they so self-righteously criticized Bernie's supporters for not doing for Hillary.

[B-Fly]

I heard a rumor that he is looking very closely at possibly naming Stacey Abrams his choice for VP early in the process. They had a not-secret/secret powwow a few days ago.

https://www.salon.com/2019/03/15/joe-bidens-meeting-with-stacey-abrams-sparks-speculation/

Abrams' popularity with African American voters and with progressives, at least based on my Facebook feed, appears to be much less equivocal than Harris's.

[B-Fly]

Another possible takeaway, if Bernie does win the nomination, he will need a lot of the never-Bernie voters to get behind him, like they so self-righteously criticized Bernie's supporters for not doing for Hillary.

I have little doubt that Democrats would do so. Independents are another kettle of fish.

I personally would have no trouble at all enthusiastically supporting either Biden or Sanders over Trump, or any of the other Democrats running. There is not a single announced Democrat who, if they won the nomination, would cause me to withhold unequivocal general election support.

[onejayhawk]

Pick the last five standing:

• Bernie
• Biden
• _
• _
• _

J

[Teenwolf]

I heard a rumor that he is looking very closely at possibly naming Stacey Abrams his choice for VP early in the process. They had a not-secret/secret powwow a few days ago.

https://www.salon.com/2019/03/15/joe-bidens-meeting-with-stacey-abrams-sparks-speculation/

Abrams' popularity with African American voters and with progressives, at least based on my Facebook feed, appears to be much less equivocal than Harris's.

Yeah, I could see that playing well. Joe could hype her up by using his tried and true ABC mantra: "Abrams is the first mainstream African-American woman who is articulate, and bright, and clean, and a nice looking person." Or do you all think he should try a different approach this time he leeches off a black person as an identifier that he's somehow progressive?

This identity politic garbage might be enough to satiate masses of voters who think along the lines of the financially comfortable centrists dominating the discourse in here. I can only hope voters see through such bullshit. I'm thankful Biden is a doddering old fool who embarrasses himself publicly every time he opens his mouth.

[B-Fly]

Yeah, I could see that playing well. Joe could hype her up by using his tried and true ABC mantra: "Abrams is the first mainstream African-American woman who is articulate, and bright, and clean, and a nice looking person." Or do you all think he should try a different approach this time he leeches off a black person as an identifier that he's somehow progressive?

This identity politic garbage might be enough to satiate masses of voters who think along the lines of the financially comfortable centrists dominating the discourse in here. I can only hope voters see through such bullshit. I'm thankful Biden is a doddering old fool who embarrasses himself publicly every time he opens his mouth.

I'm less cynical than you about government and politicians, generally, I think, having spent a lot of time in government working with public servants at all levels of office and ambition. I think there is broad agreement on values and guiding principles between Democratic "moderates" and Democratic "progressives", with the biggest difference being tactical, with regard to what one thinks is achievable and whether one believes that pursuing incremental progress toward shared ideals, growing popular and political support for further improvements over time, carries a better chance of long-term success than bold initiatives that are more likely to be demonized and stonewalled, and all of it requires issue-by-issue strategic and tactical review. Since I don't really see a major gap in values and guiding principles, I don't see something like a Biden-Abrams ticket or, say, a Sanders-Harris ticket as anything cynical or irreconcilable. There's nothing wrong with a strategy that promotes a platform broadly across sub-constituencies within the American voter pool, joining and balancing passion and pragmatism, urgency and deliberateness, big ideas and incremental improvements. So you and I view/approach politics and government very differently, even though we're very closely aligned on broad policies and values. And that's okay. I'm just going to continue presenting a different view when you seek to demonize mainstream Democrats.

[DMT]

I'm less cynical than you about government and politicians, generally, I think, having spent a lot of time in government working with public servants at all levels of office and ambition. I think there is broad agreement on values and guiding principles between Democratic "moderates" and Democratic "progressives", with the biggest difference being tactical, with regard to what one thinks is achievable and whether one believes that pursuing incremental progress toward shared ideals, growing popular and political support for further improvements over time, carries a better chance of long-term success than bold initiatives that are more likely to be demonized and stonewalled, and all of it requires issue-by-issue strategic and tactical review. Since I don't really see a major gap in values and guiding principles, I don't see something like a Biden-Abrams ticket or, say, a Sanders-Harris ticket as anything cynical or irreconcilable. There's nothing wrong with a strategy that promotes a platform broadly across sub-constituencies within the American voter pool, joining and balancing passion and pragmatism, urgency and deliberateness, big ideas and incremental improvements. So you and I view/approach politics and government very differently, even though we're very closely aligned on broad policies and values. And that's okay. I'm just going to continue presenting a different view when you seek to demonize mainstream Democrats.

Good post but I think you're brushing over the corporatist influence within the Democratic party.

[B-Fly]

Good post but I think you're brushing over the corporatist influence within the Democratic party.

That's fair. Some of that should be addressed through campaign finance reform, but sadly the Supreme Court has aided and abetted the elevation of the corporate and individual donor class, and it will require new angles/approaches that can sustain judicial review. For example, we can create a voluntary incentive-based public funding system that makes it very tempting for almost any candidate to foreswear donations. As for the revolving door between private industry and the executive branch of government in the various regulatory agencies, there can and should be more carrots and sticks leveraged to curtail the impacts that as well.

[Teenwolf]

Good summation, B-Fly. We strongly disagree on Democratic candidates sharing the same goals or ambitions.

I also believe that you've tried the pragmatic approach to governance and it failed with the ACA and supreme court nominations from Obama the glaring examples of why bipartisan compromise is a bad, dumb, stupid approach when negotiating with the present day Republican party. This is why Joe Biden's approach is so monumentally stupid.

You've also seen the pragmatic approach to campaigning as a centrist, and Hillary lost. I do not see how on earth you all continue to believe polling about Biden being a stronger general election candidate than Bernie, from the same damn sources that told you Hillary was an 80-99% lock to win on election day 2016.

[Fresno Bob]

I think if he adds Harris early as VEEP during the election process and also says that he is a one term president with the intention of grooming Harrs for the next cycle could be a winning solution.

I concur

[Sour Masher]

Another possible takeaway, if Bernie does win the nomination, he will need a lot of the never-Bernie voters to get behind him, like they so self-righteously criticized Bernie's supporters for not doing for Hillary.

Are there never-Bernie voters? I'm not aware of a voting block of true democrats (blue dogs and independents are another matter) that wouldn't vote for Bernie in the general if he gets the nomination. I'm much more worried about progressives not coming out for someone more moderate, especially if the level of disgust and hatred for the Biden's and Beto's and Harris' out there that you have expressed is indicative of more progressive voters.

I'm still completely undecided on what candidate I want to win. Still waiting and hoping you will respond to why a candidate not supporting M4A should be a deal breaker for me as a voter who cares about universal healthcare. As I've outlined, it seems to be only one path toward the same goal, and not the best path.

[TS Garp]

Good summation, B-Fly. We strongly disagree on Democratic candidates sharing the same goals or ambitions.

I also believe that you've tried the pragmatic approach to governance and it failed with the ACA and supreme court nominations from Obama the glaring examples of why bipartisan compromise is a bad, dumb, stupid approach when negotiating with the present day Republican party. This is why Joe Biden's approach is so monumentally stupid.

You've also seen the pragmatic approach to campaigning as a centrist, and Hillary lost. I do not see how on earth you all continue to believe polling about Biden being a stronger general election candidate than Bernie, from the same damn sources that told you Hillary was an 80-99% lock to win on election day 2016.

I will fervently support Bernie and contribute to his campaign if he's the nominee but I'm not a fan of populism. Bernie's version of it is much more appealing to me, of course, but I still believe -- and history has shown us -- that it's a dangerous political strategy/tool/ideology whether or not I happen to like the message.

[revo]

Another possible takeaway, if Bernie does win the nomination, he will need a lot of the never-Bernie voters to get behind him, like they so self-righteously criticized Bernie's supporters for not doing for Hillary.

I would vote for Charles Manson if that meant preventing Dopey from a 2nd term!

[Sour Masher]

I would vote for Charles Manson if that meant preventing Dopey from a 2nd term!

Me too. With Manson being dead, he would certainly do less harm, and tweet less.

[DMT]

Are there never-Bernie voters? I'm not aware of a voting block of true democrats (blue dogs and independents are another matter) that wouldn't vote for Bernie in the general if he gets the nomination. I'm much more worried about progressives not coming out for someone more moderate, especially if the level of disgust and hatred for the Biden's and Beto's and Harris' out there that you have expressed is indicative of more progressive voters.

I'm still completely undecided on what candidate I want to win. Still waiting and hoping you will respond to why a candidate not supporting M4A should be a deal breaker for me as a voter who cares about universal healthcare. As I've outlined, it seems to be only one path toward the same goal, and not the best path.

After Trump, true progressives aren't going to sit out just because they don't get their ideal candidate. And those who do can fuck right off.