So he's seen as corporate rather than progressive?
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Hes wall streets bitch.
He's definitely an establishment, corporate money type.
Well he got you using a capital letter and full stop.
Soon I'm gonna find someone you hate enough for an apostrophe.
Her unpopularity has calcified in the voting population. Its not mutable at all.
Her unpopularity is based on decades of her actions, her words can't moderate any of that. The problem is the fact that she is untrustworthy and her words blow with the wind. Its not just about what policy a candidate claims to endorse. Progressives have been hoodwinked by the much more trustworthy Obama on universal healthcare. Just look at the articles Berbatrick posted. No one is going to trust what she says to be actually what she does. When you go out and interact with everyday people, you really realize how much untrustworthiness and genuineness matters to the actual working class voters. I can't tell you how many I spoke with the last month where trust and genuineness were massive influences on how they voted. One union worker said last week 'even if I like the policies if I can't trust the candidate I won't vote for them'.
Or a comment I just saw on Reddit "if its Trump vs Clinton I won't vote for either, If its Clinton vs. average GOP, I vote GOP, if its Trump vs. average DNC, I vote DNC"
That we don't know. She did manage to get a hell of a lot of votes last cycle and the prospects of a 2nd Trump term would animate a hell of a lot of people to go to the polls next time.
We are in hell world.
We know it as much as any maxim of politics. Remember 53% of Trump voters were specifically voters Against Hilary. No other Democrat turns out the vote against like she could. I think she is actually more unpopular than the media polling reflects. I think you massively underestimate how many people would be negatively motivated if they actually barfed up a Clinton-Trump rematch. Haven't talked to a single person among hundreds who have a more positive view of Hilary now than 2016. She is the one single candidate that is going to send people voting 3rd party or just stay home out of despair. Every Republican I know would absolutely love a rematch and every progressive-liberal I know dreads the prospect.
I think it would animate people to go to the polls for any generic Dem, it would be risky (to put it absurdly mildly) to re-use the one candidate the GOP and the left of the US despise in equal measure. Just, why would you do it?
2032 News Flash: Hillary Clinton clinches her 5th successive Democratic nomination, battling incumbent President Ivanka Trump again.
Nah it’s just an unflattering trouser suit.
Only upside to Hilary running would be a Sanders/Beto would actually have a decent outside chance as third party if they picked the right VP
Outside chance at New Hampshire and Vermont, maybe.
Most likely scenario:
A. Trump wins outright, eking out enough votes in key states for an EC landslide.
B. None get the required EC. Election got thrown to the house, each state delegation get to cast 1 vote -> more Republican states -> President Trump, part deux.
That guarantees a Republican win. Winner takes all in US, so Trump will likely get 400+ electoral votes.
= sure Trump re-election.
That's the power of Cory Booker capitalism.
Applauds furiously
I am already firmly in the camp that a Hilary rematch already = sure Trump re-election. To the point that I would bet every single spare penny I have to invest in Trump winning re-election against her the second she won the nomination.
Actually I might save a little to bet on Bernie outvoting Hilary on an independent ticket. Would definitely get better odds on that one so maybe 5-10% of spare pennies on that longer shot bet.
If Hillary is even mentioned as a viable candidate in 2020 then the Dems should cease as a viable party
Even the small percentage chance of B makes it worth it to me as I see a straight rematch as far more damaging long term than any other option at this point. B at least helps in breaking the corporate lobbyist influence on the Democrats and helps induce positive changes for the long term.
I definitely agree.
Nah there will be no 3rd party run. If there wasn't in 2016 after the primary shenanigans and with everyone expecting Clinton to sail through, there won't be one when Trump is actually in power and nobody doubts his popularity among the base.
That and it would only serve to gift the presidency to the side not running a third party.
If they nominated Hilary they are already gifting Trump a 2nd term so nothing to lose
I don't think that's the case. If he beat her by say 200 EVs and she didn't win the popular last cycle then that sort of argument may have legs, but given how close it was (not to mention all the shenanigans with Comey, Russia etc) its difficult to make a cogent case that he would win again, especially with the hindsight of his 4 years of poor job performance.
Was it that close though?
I mean, Bush-Gore was very close, Bush-Kerry was quite close, this one wasn't exactly close.
On an another note, I looked today at electoral map changing during the years. I had no idea that Kennedy lost California but won Texas. Despite being only 50 years ago it looks impossible to have happened.
That's only from your perspective. For the conservative 45% of the population his job performance has been fantastic and by every measure he has solidified far more base support than last time. Whereas Hilary has no support among progressives or moderates who would sooner stay home than vote for her which is in stark contrast to a Bernie/Beto type of candidate that has a far higher vote ceiling.
53% of Trump voters were specifically voting against Hilary a record number of Against voters.
Meanwhile Gallup has HRC's unfavorable rating at an all time low as of Sept.2018 - significantly lower than when she was running in 2016:
Also remember Bush also lost the popular vote in 2000 and remember the electoral map in 2004? Even after exit polls actually had Kerry in a slight lead?
Last edited:
Pfft, so says someone that's never watched Mad Men.
That's only from your perspective. For the conservative 45% of the population his job performance has been fantastic and by every measure he has solidified far more base support than last time. Whereas Hilary has no support among progressives or moderates who would sooner stay home than vote for her which is in stark contrast to a Bernie/Beto type of candidate that has a far higher vote ceiling.
53% of Trump voters were specifically voting against Hilary a record number of Against voters.
Meanwhile Gallup has HRC's unfavorable rating at an all time low as of Sept.2018 - lower than when she was running in 2016:
The GOP is closer to about 28% of the electorate, not 45. The rest are base dems and the largest group are independents.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx
If Trump is only polling well among his ever shrinking base, and is simultaneously underwater among independents, then that's a pretty good indication that he is in worse shape now and leading up to 2020 than he was in 2016, mainly because the electorate is more organizaed and galvanized to make a change next cycle.
And Hilary's base is also ever shrinking by that measure because she polls horrible and focus groups even worse among the independent group you mention - the very group from progressives that identity as independent to political moderates, libertarians and eccentrics that identify to pollsters as independent that make up the biggest pool.
I really think you are living in a bubble if you believe Hilary actually has a better chance in 2020 than she did in 2016. We can make a public bet though if she wins the nomination because I am 100% convinced Trump would demolish her in the EC in 2020.
I don't necessarily think she's a better choice but I just don't buy any of the arguments put forth as to why she shouldn't run. If she decides to run she would likely become the frontrunner once again because she has a pretty decent sized base of support who think she got screwed last time and who also think going hard left isn't realistic or feasible. Therefore if she decides to run and in the process tactically modulates her positions to appeal more to progressive aspirations (healthcare, education etc) then she would be the leading candidate imo. Not because she's the best option, but because she would be up against a weak Dem field whose top two guys are in their mid to late 70s.
To my shame, I have to admit it.
Well you are underselling your own statistic you posted earlier about Beto and Sinema's performance. And age doesn't work against Bernie when he comes off as having more energy than she did even two years ago.
Also it doesn't match what I hear from the grassroots which is strong, strong anti-Clinton feelings moving forward even from people who willingly voted for her. Its a massive strategy mistake imo
If what you're hearing in the grass roots is correct then she will be easily shaken out during the primaries. If she isn't and winds up the nominee, then it will be a good indicator that what you're hearing is little more than an echo chamber of groupthink sentiment among progressives and not the broader Dem electorate.
That assumes that the only structural shenanigans that Team Clintn pulled in 2016 was with superdelegates and she doesn't do something like try to muscle/bribe out other contenders. For example how Liz Warren refused to even challenge her in 2016 when Warren's prestige was at its peak. If HC takes on a full field of Democrats then I firmly believe she will easily be stomped out. But if she again uses the Clinton money network and it still hasn't lost potency then they might force other candidates out before fair competition can happen.
This is why Ojeda already declaring is a good sign as it sends momentum for the other candidates to declare early and avoid the back room dealing that went on in 2016 and tried to happen in 2008 as well. Obama got out in front of it. That needs to happen now.
I don't think it would matter in the end. There could be a battalion of anonymous newcomers who join the primary race, but they would quickly run out of money once it becomes apparent that this is a 2 or 3 horse race among the likes of Sanders, Biden, and Clinton. I personally don't know if she will run but if she did, it would definitely shake out most of the otherwise viable centrist contenders like Booker, Harris, and a few others.
Groupthink is the 2018 version of 2017’s pivot
- Status