That's not how probability works
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Nixon won the nomination, and was very close to winning in his first try. Reagan very nearly beat an incumbent Republican president in the primaries. Bush didn't do as well as the other two, but he got near a quarter of the vote. All of them also have in common that they failed the once, and then won on their next try.
Biden failed spectacularly the first time, dropping out before anyone had the chance to vote for him, and was sitting at a cool 2-4% in the polls when he dropped out the second time. There is no comparison. Feel free to use the Obama-factor as "recent history suggests", but using Nixon, Reagan and Bush is wildly misleading.
The point is failing at winning POTUS in the past doesn’t in any way mean candidates wouldn’t win in the future. The three I listed came from politically disparate backgrounds, failed - then won.
Gore is another - VP to within a whisker of POTUS if not for the hanging chad shenanigans of Y2K.
Biden may not become President, but if he doesn’t, it won’t be because he failed in past attempts.
every cycle is different.
Just looking at how past VPs did and trying to extrapolate is pointless.
Biden has his own strengths and weaknesses.
We are in a very different dynamic to Reagan and Bush.
Those men bring very little to the table now.
Needs for the majority are far greater. Why what would be called fringe policies like Medicare For All and Free College and Climate Change are important now.
It is in that context politicians like Biden offer very little or nothing.
It is the very reason Trump came to power.
Biden is saying we need to defeat Trump.
Talk about stating the obvious. That tactic failed spectacularly the last cycle.
Just looking at how past VPs did and trying to extrapolate is pointless.
Biden has his own strengths and weaknesses.
We are in a very different dynamic to Reagan and Bush.
Those men bring very little to the table now.
Needs for the majority are far greater. Why what would be called fringe policies like Medicare For All and Free College and Climate Change are important now.
It is in that context politicians like Biden offer very little or nothing.
It is the very reason Trump came to power.
Biden is saying we need to defeat Trump.
Talk about stating the obvious. That tactic failed spectacularly the last cycle.
And my point is that Biden isn't in any way comparable to those three. They merely failed, once, while Biden melted down, twice.
You have my argument the wrong way around. I'm not saying he could fail because he failed previously, I'm saying he failed previously because he's not very good at running a Presidential campaign.
The circumstances are irrelevant. Gore also did poorly in 88 and came within a hair of winning in 2000. Bush 41 finished a distant 2nd in a two horse primary race in 80, then won the Presidency 8 years later, which is precisely the situation Biden finds himself in today.
I agree.
No it's not dude. Buden didn't finish a distant second in any primary. He flamed out 3 different times.
How are the circumstances irrelevant? Seems like the circumstances is the very point of this. And again, with Bush, it's not the same. It just isn't. He finished a distant 2nd with a quarter of the vote. Biden finished 5th with a hundredth of the vote. Even Gore, who you say did poorly, did far better than Biden ever did.
I'm not saying that Biden's Vice-Presidential path is a disadvantage, or not an advantage at all. It clearly is, which is why he's doing so well now. But we have to temper our expectations with the knowledge that Biden has run two extremely unsuccessful campaigns in the past. That obviously doesn't mean he's going to lose this time, but it's also obviously relevant. We're going to have to wait for the debates and the full campaigning to decide if we're getting more of Biden the Vice-President or Biden the primary failure.
Basically, at this point he's the front-runner without really having done anything. Let's wait until he starts doing stuff.
1988 was poorly run due to the plagiarism issue and infighting within his campaign operatives. I seriously doubt that sort of thing would be a factor this time. I get the impression Biden's opponents are trying a bit too hard to frame him as a serial failure, therefore "why bother this time", which won't work. He has been a known political commodity for decades and is currently soaring higher than he ever has in his political life, so it wont be easy to beat him.
Substance over name recognition will be the key.
Bernie and Warren have specific positions on how to help the millions.
This will get amplified over the months leading to the primaries.
If he wins the nomination he will win as I said.
But note. Trump's path still is through the Rust belt.
The economy is still good. Jobs numbers also.
It will need specific issues to move the needle.
Saying Trump is a 'bad guy' wont be enough.
EDIT: Polls at this point is quite meaningless.
Bernie and Warren have specific positions on how to help the millions.
This will get amplified over the months leading to the primaries.
If he wins the nomination he will win as I said.
But note. Trump's path still is through the Rust belt.
The economy is still good. Jobs numbers also.
It will need specific issues to move the needle.
Saying Trump is a 'bad guy' wont be enough.
EDIT: Polls at this point is quite meaningless.
Pretty much meaningless at this point, but polls seem to have stabilized; 35% for Biden, 15-20% for Bernie, 5-10% for Warren and Harris and 4-6% for Buttigieg and Beto.
One reason I don't like all these national polls is that primaries are not conducted simultaneously. They are staggered over months and different states have different degrees of importance. One thing that makes 2020 different from every other primary is that this time California moved its primary up to the first Super Tuesday thus making it relevant. In 2016 Clinton had literally already won the nomination by the time California voted (due to super delegate spam). That is a massive difference. 2020 is the first time in modern era that California is relevant to primaries. And it was quite clear at the State Democrat convention that Biden wisely avoided that he is not going to win the Golden State. California is going to give a lot of delegates to other candidates at a relevant point in the primary cycle and that could very well make the difference in sinking Biden as he will look weak when he comes here. The fact California changed its primary makes a lot of the old received wisdom less smart to follow.
Biden is leading Bernie and Harris by 8 points in the only poll from CA. Bernie has a good chance in the early primaries/caucuses in IA, NH and NV. Super Tuesday in 2020 will be held in CA, 7 southern states, CO, NH, MN, UT and MA. Biden will probably win CA and sweep all the southern states.
I'll say right now that no matter where Biden might win he won't win in California.
hellworld
Hillary won CA in 2016 by 12 points. I think it will be a close race but Biden is still the (slight) favorite to win the CA primary imo.
Because of super-delegates HRC had already secured the nomination BEFORE California even voted in the primary so it was a dead election. Many Bernie supporters stayed home and others just voted Clinton because she already won. Its like looking at a friendly with the 21-unders and making conclusions about the senior side.
Centrist' 2020 Candidates Get BOOED Off Stage
Hillary won both super-delegates and regular delegates, and your CA argument can be said about any big blue state, NY for example? Hillary won there, when the primaries weren't "dead" yet. I think the main reason why CA will be a close race this year, is that Harris will definitely be still in the race on Super Tuesday, most of her voters would vote for Biden if it was a two-candidate race.
Not sure if NY is the best example because that was her home state.
That's always been debatable, and that still doesn't change the fact that Bernie and his campaign viewed NY as a winnable primary, just like CA.
Fairly interesting, probably doesn’t matter too much if he has a high floor, but eschewing rallies and voters interaction in favour of fundraisers may bite him in the ass.
No it really can't there is big differences between the electorates of NY in 2016 and California in 2020 which you would understand if you actually lived here.
What is your basis knowledge on California's demographics? How many years have you lived here in the last 20 years? How many political rallies in California have you attended? How many people that attended the California state Dem convention have you talked to?
How many focus groups (academic and informal) have you conducted in California? How much research and writing have you done on California culture and demographics?
You made a huge mistake already in trying to use 2016 as some indicator of 2020 when that is fundamentally wrong without you even realizing that HRC had already locked up the nomination before California voted.
So far its been a smart move as much as I hate to admit it. While Biden got a little bad publicity from skipping the California state convention, it would have been far worse had he attended. He would have been absolutely eviscerated by the passionate progressive and liberal crowd (not many centrists there) and would have received far worse publicity than he got by skipping it.
personally I am thinking that California moving its primary is the biggest thing stopping Biden at this point. Had it been like 2016 Biden would be able to play it even more safe. But now he has to be at least a little proactive which I think hurts him.
She won California against Obama in 08. Sure, 2016’s primaries were over by that point, but chalking her win there against Sanders purely down to the apathy factor is simplistic to say the least, especially when exit polls were basically identical to other big states she won.
There are very little divergence between national and states polls at the moment. Wouldn’t surprise me if his number holds and he edges out a modest win there, just as it wouldn’t surprise me if he flames out come the debates.
He’s ceding a lot of coverage to the chasing pack by avoiding headline grabbing events though, also save them a lot of funds on local media markets when the big ones are covering them for free.
Biden will be found out to be the fraud he is soon enough.
He has nothing to offer. And he is lazy.
He has nothing to offer. And he is lazy.
I think you need to take it easy
.NY (state) is 58% White non-Hispanic, 18% Hispanic, 15% African American and 8% Asian (+ other two or more races).
CA is 38% White non-Hispanic, 40% Hispanic, 5% African American, 15% Asian (and 2% other or two or more races).
Based on demographics alone, Bernie's chances of winning CA shouldn't be higher than his chances of winning NY.
I think you need to take it easy
NY (state) is 58% White non-Hispanic, 18% Hispanic, 15% African American and 8% Asian (+ other two or more races).
CA is 38% White non-Hispanic, 40% Hispanic, 5% African American, 15% Asian (and 2% other or two or more races).
Based on demographics alone, Bernie's chances of winning CA shouldn't be higher than his chances of winning NY.
This is what I mean about not understanding the fundamental differences between California and New York cultures. Demographics isn't just about quoting some basic racial data of which you are looking some massive differences anyway. But its understanding what communities those data points actually represent. California is flat out more progressive than New York and has tons of fairly major cultural differences. Spend a month in NYC and spend a month in San Francisco and you can probably start to grok the differences. NYC is far more laissez-faire capitalist than SF among other things - 'everyone in NYC wants to get rich, everyone in LA wants to get famous', 'in NYC they say feck you to your face, in LA they only ever say it behind your back', 'a NY girl that thinks she is a 10 is only an LA 7', etc
Also Clinton in 2016 had spent their lives building a power base in New York since they attended Yale in nearby Connecticut. The Clintons courted Wall Street and Madison Ave elites in the 1990s, Clinton was Sentator of New York for 8 years, the Clinton Foundation is set up in New York City, etc.
Biden in 2020 has nothing remotely similar in California. Biden's entire power base is in that Northeast seaboard. He has no connections to CA like Clinton did to NY. And your unsupported claim that all Harris voters will just flock to Biden isn't really supported by the reality either. Harris has a big power base in Oakland and San Francisco that she has cultivated for years coming out of the Willie Brown network. That network is not just going to flip support to Biden with whom they have no established connections (unlike Clinton in NY in 2016). Biden has support from a minor California congresswomen who owes him from working in the Obama admin. Bernie has Danny DeVito showing up at rallies. You can guess which plays better in California.
Last edited:
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/06/oc...crats-they-will-lose-the-presidency-to-trump/
Ocasio-Cortez warns lobbyist-backed Democrats they ‘will lose the presidency to Trump’
Ocasio-Cortez warns lobbyist-backed Democrats they ‘will lose the presidency to Trump’
When you look at Biden before Obama chose him as running mate. His policies would make any Republican proud.
indeed.
California is slightly more progressive than NY indeed, but I'm not sure this will be enough for Bernie to win the CA primary even with Harris still in the race. And I think you're underestimating the role of demographics in the primaries. In 2016, Bernie won NH, CO, MN, OK, VT, KS, NE, ME, MI, ID, UT, AL, HI, WA, OR, WI, WY, RI, IN, MT and SD. Do you see anything in common between these states other than demographics?
Also worth bearing in mind that Liz Warren will eat into Sanders’ piece of the pie in Cali - so unlike 4 years ago, he will be getting hit from the Center (Biden), the Progs (Warren), as well as a relatively popular local candidate in Harris. That will result in a tall order in him winning Cali since the sources of his votes will be diluted by way of the others still being in the race. That favors Biden to win.
When key policies are being debated, both Bernie and Warren will eat into the corporate candidates pie.
They aren’t some sort of tag team. They are competing against one another for the same votes.
The Dems really need to get their shit together quickly. Considering the damage Trump has already done in a first term, a second term where he has nothing left to lose would really make the wheels come off imho.
It seems so easy for the DNC to rebrand itself as the true patriots and defenders of American families and take away a sizeable voting block from the republicans in doing so. But no.. Of course they ll get hung up on immigration. There is a reason why the Republicans keep harping on that one because they know no moderate is going to agree having open borders is a good idea. In the end, people care about their own well being first, both left and right. If this is truly the greatest country then we should indeed have an immigration policy like Canada instead of making it an all or nothing game.
It seems so easy for the DNC to rebrand itself as the true patriots and defenders of American families and take away a sizeable voting block from the republicans in doing so. But no.. Of course they ll get hung up on immigration. There is a reason why the Republicans keep harping on that one because they know no moderate is going to agree having open borders is a good idea. In the end, people care about their own well being first, both left and right. If this is truly the greatest country then we should indeed have an immigration policy like Canada instead of making it an all or nothing game.
What I am saying is that they will expand their base.
The so called Centrist voter is shrinking. That is why when the DNC aims for the center it falls through the cracks.
Increasingly we are seeing polarization.
I do believe it is intentional for so called centrist candidates to be vague or give lip service. This serves the corporate agenda.
I beg you, look at the 2016 DNC. There was an entire day dedicated to national security. Multiple Republicans spoke about how tough Hillary is and how dangerous Donald will be on national security. They epically owned Trump by putting a Muslim war hero reciting the constitution on stage, and he took the bait.
The strategy you are hoping for is literally the losing strategy of 2016.
Also I'm interested in which Democrat wants open borders.
This is more dnc received wisdom that assumes nothing changes for Comcast Joe and the worst case happens for Bernie. Its just as likely that Harris, Beto or Pete surge during the debates and full campaign and Biden flops on Cali.
- Status