2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
bazalini said:
Maybe for the Democrats to win They need to put forward a far right candidate like Steve Bannon as an independent and split the Republican vote. Trump has a very loyal fan base. But they are only loyal to his hard line bigoted view and like all far right = they will be prepared to even go harder at a worst candidate.
Click to expand...
Steve Bannon tried to take on Trump and he learnt his lesson well. He certainly won't be going up against Trump for anything. Trump has a cult following amongst his rabid voters and they will always vote for him regardless.

Ideally you would have a well respected Republican of sorts by mainstream America who can't stand Trump to split the vote like a Ben Sasse who might split the vote amongst the moderate Republicans. I don't think it would work though as generally Republicans seem better at coming together. It also costs a heck of lot to run as President at a national scale so it's easier said than done. Nah for the Democrats to win they just need to make sure they have a half decent candidate and not get too cocky and just focus on winning the key swing states.
 
NoLogo said:
I won't deny that their lack of great candidates is a problem. Sanders or Warren would probably my choice but Sanders again will most likely lack the support of the DNC again and Warren like you said hasn't got the same pull to her name as Sanders for example. On the other hand maybe they can find a political outsider who isn't bat shit crazy and can still create a massive pull, especially with the younger voters. That being said I totally see this being a huge problem for them.
Click to expand...

Naw Warren was far more famous and respected than Sanders pre-2016 election. She would have no problem with name recognition.
That's something people overestimate in this era of instant fame. As long as a candidate is charismatic and plays well on TV they will be fine in 2020. They just have to avoid picking an uninspiring dud.

Basically if the Democrats mix one of Bernie, Biden and Warren with one of the younger more inspiring candidates like Harris, Tulsi, Garcetti etc that is the type of combination they need that would be far stronger than the very weak Clinton/Kaine (who was one of the worst VP choices I can remember).
 
oneniltothearsenal said:
Naw Warren was far more famous and respected than Sanders pre-2016 election. She would have no problem with name recognition.
That's something people overestimate in this era of instant fame. As long as a candidate is charismatic and plays well on TV they will be fine in 2020. They just have to avoid picking an uninspiring dud.

Basically if the Democrats mix one of Bernie, Biden and Warren with one of the younger more inspiring candidates like Harris, Tulsi, Garcetti etc that is the type of combination they need that would be far stronger than the very weak Clinton/Kaine (who was one of the worst VP choices I can remember).
Click to expand...

Biden Garcetti would make a hell of a ticket.
 
Sanders should stand again and run. If he is on the ballot, any one of the independents who attacked Bernie bros (fairly, in my opinion) should vote for Sanders as he is a better person than Trump
 
FlawlessThaw said:
Steve Bannon tried to take on Trump and he learnt his lesson well. He certainly won't be going up against Trump for anything. Trump has a cult following amongst his rabid voters and they will always vote for him regardless.

Ideally you would have a well respected Republican of sorts by mainstream America who can't stand Trump to split the vote like a Ben Sasse who might split the vote amongst the moderate Republicans. I don't think it would work though as generally Republicans seem better at coming together. It also costs a heck of lot to run as President at a national scale so it's easier said than done. Nah for the Democrats to win they just need to make sure they have a half decent candidate and not get too cocky and just focus on winning the key swing states.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the Sasse angle wouldn't work since Trump, through his own cult of personality control of the GOP and Fox, would simply snuff out any attempts to split the vote. Sasse himself is very conservative so there wouldn't really be much middle of the road Rino support. They would probably be more amenable to supporting Biden in that case.
 
Raoul said:
The Bernie v Trump poll has to be taken with a pinch of salt since they never actually ran against one another, so voters never really had a chance to make a realistic assessment between the two. Also, Bernie was never subjected to the wrath of Trump's propaganda machine, which would've eroded a significant chunk of his support by election day to where the real numbers could've been more in line with Hillary's towards the end.
Click to expand...

That's just conjecture.

Hillary did not have any message. She simply hung on to Obama's coat tails. "No change" is not a message. All she did was attack Trump while she had all the Clinton baggage.

Sanders resonated with all age groups. The Socialist label being more important than Health Care, Social Security and College Tuition would only have mattered with older voters who were unlikely to vote for him anyway.

He clearly had support in the Midwest and Rust Belt States., where she was toxic.

As for 2020, the DNC would do everything to block her. Far too many bitter memories.
 
Red Dreams said:
That's just conjecture.

Hillary did not have any message. She simply hung on to Obama's coat tails. "No change" is not a message. All she did was attack Trump while she had all the Clinton baggage.

Sanders resonated with all age groups. The Socialist label being more important than Health Care, Social Security and College Tuition would only have mattered with older voters who were unlikely to vote for him anyway.

He clearly had support in the Midwest and Rust Belt States., where she was toxic.

As for 2020, the DNC would do everything to block her. Far too many bitter memories.
Click to expand...

I doubt she would even run (which she shouldn't), but lets not pretend that the situation today would be any different if it was Clinton or Sanders in the WH. They are both better than Trump and neither would've been able to move policy forward due to the GOP Congress. Only tangible difference between the two is we would be all in on TPP which Sanders and Trump opposed.
 
Raoul said:
I doubt she would even run (which she shouldn't), but lets not pretend that the situation today would be any different if it was Clinton or Sanders in the WH. They are both better than Trump and neither would've been able to move policy forward due to the GOP Congress. Only tangible difference between the two is we would be all in on TPP which Sanders and Trump opposed.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree that there would have been no tangible difference.
Firstly Sanders would have helped downticket a lot more. People did not show up for Hillary. simple.

What Sanders fought on is what all Americans want., with the exception of the parasites at the top. It would have been extremely difficult for Republicans to fight against Real positive Healthcare change, strengthening (not saving ;) )Social Security for example.

Coming to power on such positive messages strengthen the mandate of the president.

the only thing we can agree on is both would have been better than Trump. so what. most on here would have been better than Trump.
 
Red Dreams said:
We'll have to agree to disagree that there would have been no tangible difference.
Firstly Sanders would have helped downticket a lot more. People did not show up for Hillary. simple.

What Sanders fought on is what all Americans want., with the exception of the parasites at the top. It would have been extremely difficult for Republicans to fight against Real positive Healthcare change, strengthening (not saving ;) )Social Security for example.

Coming to power on such positive messages strengthen the mandate of the president.

the only thing we can agree on is both would have been better than Trump. so what most on here would have been better than Trump.
Click to expand...

I'm talking specifically about policy. There's nothing that either Clinton or Sanders could've passed in light of a GOP congress. In fact, she would've likely had a better chance of moving policy re: Russia and elsewhere since there is bipartisan support for that.
 
Raoul said:
I'm talking specifically about policy. There's nothing that either Clinton or Sanders could've passed in light of a GOP congress. In fact, she would've likely had a better chance of moving policy re: Russia and elsewhere since there is bipartisan support for that.
Click to expand...

see my post above. Sanders ran on issues that benefit all Americans. He may not have had Single Payer for example. But he was realistic and certainly would have improved vastly on the ACA. The public option which he was alluding too.

He would have held the Republicans feet to the fire on issues like this. Why Americans could not get Health care as a matter of right.

Re Foreign policy he would have had many experienced people to advice him even if he was reluctant to get into an open conflict. These issues are far less consequential to the electorate.

In the other thread where the debate was about winning as compared to message. The key point I was making is both parties had won over the last 40 years or more.
The only constant losers were the American people.

any election is about people, not parties.

As I have said the Democratic party has abandoned its base. It is simply another conduit for Corporations to enrich themselves.

Even a prosperous economy has left millions untouched. How could it when there is no mandated Living wage.

This is the need that is and has to be addressed.
 
Cal? said:
Interesting...

Elections are about people, yet the Bernie bros refuse to acknowledge that million more people voted for Hillary in the primary.
Click to expand...

It’s a ven diagram though. Bernie could pick up the same democratic votes if up against a Republican rather than Clinton but also pick up a lot of independents and more anarchic votes that Trump collected that Hillary couldn’t.

Conversely, he’d likely lose some centre/centre-right votes that Hillary picked up.
 
Pexbo said:
It’s a ven diagram though. Bernie could pick up the same democratic votes if up against a Republican rather than Clinton but also pick up a lot of independents and more anarchic votes that Trump collected that Hillary couldn’t.

Conversely, he’d likely lose some centre/centre-right votes that Hillary picked up.
Click to expand...
Based on the results, it is very true that Sanders could have won as he’d possibly have performed better in those 3 states and FL.

But it’s pointless speculation anyway.
 
Running against an incumbent in a fundamentally strong economy equals starting with a deficit, even if the incumbent is Trump.

The question for the Dems is what is the mood of the electorate? Are they sick and tired of the indignities and circus surrounding the current president, or they are indifferent and happy with their bottom line, because that will determine their target group (base vs. crossovers/indies).

I love Warren, but cant help but think she missed her boat in 2016. Her economic message would have played well in the general, and she had more credentials with the rank-and-file Democrats than Bernie in primaries. Not hard to imagine her winning Iowa and New Hampshire, not get blown out in the Southern states the way Bernie did, being from OK herself, and winning the Midwest states in Super Tuesday. Clinton would still be stronger in the metropolitan areas/big blue states like Cali/NY but she'd get fewer delegates lead in those states while getting beaten in all the small states, a 08 scenario. Running this time after Clinton would encumber her with the 'Dems trying to play identity politics yet again', which dilutes her appeal.

Ultimately though, the message matters, and a left(ish) candidate should consider galvanising the 40% of eligible voters who chronically don't turn up. There are very few independents and sacrificing the content and spirit of your message to get a vote here and there isn't a long term strategy for electoral success. Even as they lost repeatedly in presidential contest, Democrats used to have control of Congress for 40 years. They must build on getting a coalition that can deliver the same, not hoping for an inspirational candidate once in a blue moon to carry the bucket.
 
Raoul said:
She also benefited from a corrupt system that helped her cheat her way to victory over any potential Dem opponent by way of superdelegates.
Click to expand...
The superdelegates is a fundamentally flawed system. The DNC will never dare to go against the will of the people (result of the primaries) to nominate someone else.
 
villain said:
Please god, I truly hope Sanders, Warren et al don't run again.

All these 'alt' options will only give Trump an easier route to victory.
Click to expand...

Bollocks. Bernie would wipe the floor with Trump. Personally, I think Bernie is the greatest politician I have ever seen and heard in my life. Yes, he has many flaws, but he's so right on so many issues and he really does hit so many nails on their heads and tick the boxes I feel are important. Perfect, no, but he was a billion times better than Shillary.

Tbh, Bernie isn't too far left, he's not far enough imho. But he's the fecking man!
 
langster said:
Bollocks. Bernie would wipe the floor with Trump. Personally, I think Bernie is the greatest politician I have ever seen and heard in my life. Yes, he has many flaws, but he's so right on so many issues and he really does hit so many nails on their heads and tick the boxes I feel are important. Perfect, no, but he was a billion times better than Shillary.

Tbh, Bernie isn't too far left, he's not far enough imho. But he's the fecking man!
Click to expand...

Yeah but can he beat Biden first ?
 
FlawlessThaw said:
just focus on winning the key swing states.
Click to expand...

Isn't that partly why people hated Clinton? She only campaigned/visited certain states and forgot about the rest and those people voted for Trump instead?

The Democrats need a candidate that appeals everywhere even if the swing states are the ones that are important.
 
langster said:
Bollocks. Bernie would wipe the floor with Trump. Personally, I think Bernie is the greatest politician I have ever seen and heard in my life. Yes, he has many flaws, but he's so right on so many issues and he really does hit so many nails on their heads and tick the boxes I feel are important. Perfect, no, but he was a billion times better than Shillary.

Tbh, Bernie isn't too far left, he's not far enough imho. But he's the fecking man!
Click to expand...

Just a shame Bernie isn't 10 years younger. If he does run again, then his age will become a talking point and used against him by his rivals.
 
matherto said:
Isn't that partly why people hated Clinton? She only campaigned/visited certain states and forgot about the rest and those people voted for Trump instead?

The Democrats need a candidate that appeals everywhere even if the swing states are the ones that are important.
Click to expand...

I don't really remember that as a criticism of hers (she had plenty). It's fair to say she only appealed to a certain amount of people and the deplorable comment put a lot of people off but there wasn't any major criticism about her not visiting Idaho or somewhere random like that.
 
Raoul said:
Yeah but can he beat Biden first ?
Click to expand...

I doubt it tbh. I think that's a tough call but one I think Biden would win. I think a Bernie Biden or Warren ticket would be great, but I can't see it happening. Whatever, any of those three would be a massive step in the right direction as all three would be able to help show and move things in the right direction.
 
langster said:
I doubt it tbh. I think that's a tough call but one I think Biden would win. I think a Bernie Biden or Warren ticket would be great, but I can't see it happening. Whatever, any of those three would be a massive step in the right direction as all three would be able to help show and move things in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Bernie would do well by finding a good hybrid Dem who is younger and has reach into the center as a VP. If he chooses another leftist running mate then he will be branded a fringe candidate. If however he chooses someone who supports his policies but is also viewed as moderate then that will draw in more independents.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Dems should avoid a bruising primary at all costs. Want to oppose Trump? Put up an unified front. If Sanders is serious about running, then give it to him
Click to expand...

They will have at least half a dozen candidates, ranging from vaguely viable to frontrunners in the mix. Only having one person would wind up with a Hillary like situation where the establishment gets behind one candidate to the exclusion of a non-establishment one.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Dems should avoid a bruising primary at all costs. Want to oppose Trump? Put up an unified front. If Sanders is serious about running, then give it to him
Click to expand...
That is so not going to happen, they did not want Sanders the last time and do not want Sanders this time.
 
Raoul said:
Depends who "they" is. Sanders is certainly viable enough among voters to win the nomination.
Click to expand...

The nomination process needs to be completely above board with no bias towards any candidate. The party machinery needs to stay out of it.

If this happens, all voters can get behind the winning candidate. Democratic Socialists are viable, be it Sanders or not.

But it is clear Sanders will run again.
 
Cal? said:
That is so not going to happen, they did not want Sanders the last time and do not want Sanders this time.
Click to expand...

No, what they don't want is a corrupt, untrustworthy, hugely flawed, complety inept and massively disliked, corporate bought hawk like Hillary.

If the Dems have learned their lessons it will mean they fully back Bernie if he wins the nomination.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.