Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sinn Fein

2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Sinn Fein said:

It's less of an issue in a big race, than it was for Bernie v. Clinton.

But, if Harris dominates in California that could really set her up through to the convention. 

Well black voters won’t decide California. Progressives might.

Truth is it’s been so long since California has had a say in determining Democratic Presidential politics (or Republican for that matter) that I have no idea how it will go, except that Northern California tends to dominate over southern (as witness that all of our senators and governors tend to be from the San Francisco area). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, timschochet said:

Well black voters won’t decide California. Progressives might.

Truth is it’s been so long since California has had a say in determining Democratic Presidential politics (or Republican for that matter) that I have no idea how it will go, except that Northern California tends to dominate over southern (as witness that all of our senators and governors tend to be from the San Francisco area). 

Given, Harris' base of operations in the Bay Area, and name recognition - I would expect Harris to win California - but the margins will matter and if anyone can come in a close 2nd or 3rd that would dilute the results a little.  But, if Harris can win big in her home state - that should be enough momentum for her to ride to the convention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ShamrockPride said:

Seems like identity politics are alive and well in the Democratic party...

I think that is true in any party - whether its the 2-party system here in the US - or the multi-party systems more prevalent in Europe.

 

It almost sounds like you think this is not going on in the GOP - but I know you know better.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ShamrockPride said:

Seems like identity politics are alive and well in the Democratic party...

Well, the Republican party has essentially become the party of white identity politics.  I think it's bad and unhealthy that we now have one party for whites and another one for non-whites, but here we are.

  • Like 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Segregated thought, segregated policies. Very unhealthy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Well, the Republican party has essentially become the party of white identity politics.  I think it's bad and unhealthy that we now have one party for whites and another one for non-whites, but here we are.

My gut agrees  but this quote from the Klobuchar 538 article reminded me that it really isn't. 

Quote

This year’s Democratic field features several people of color, however, and Klobuchar doesn’t have any obvious strategy to appeal to black, Hispanic and Asian voters, which together will make up around 40 percent of the Democratic primary electorate

In the Democratic party there are more diverse sub-groups, many of them broken down racial lines. In the same way that Klobuchar appeals to the "beer track" vs the "wine track." It becomes a natural constituency.

Likability starts with appearing to be like me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, prefontaine said:

My gut agrees  but this quote from the Klobuchar 538 article reminded me that it really isn't. 

That was an excellent article BTW.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

That was an excellent article BTW.  

Yeah - I thought they generally did a good job on all the candidates - at least at this stage.

 

I think we need to wait until the summer - when we should start to see some positioning firm up among the candidates.  But, even then MSM will be focused on overall polling numbers.  The devil is in the details though.

Also - I suspect candidates will be mapping out strategies where they don't need to win in certain areas to win the nomination.  For example, Iowa will be much more important to Klobuchar than it will to Harris - but Harris will want a decent showing - to prove she can win in the mid-west.  Same thing with Warren - she will want momentum headed to New Hampshire - where she would be expected to compete with Bernie for top spot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not too worried about any of the gaffes/negative articles that come out now - anything now will be forgotten by the summer (with the exception of Warren's ancestry).

Right now - its about fundraising, raising name recognition, developing that delegate strategy, and building the infrastructure out.

 

Based on early info - I give Harris and Warren a bit of a head start on both.  Bernie can jump in pretty quickly if he wants.  I am not sure Biden can move as quickly - read an article last week that state folks have not heard from him yet.  I know Warren hired a really strong team in Iowa - and I think Harris has a strong organization as well.

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rockaction said:

Segregated thought, segregated policies. Very unhealthy.  

Did any Republican media personality do this before Limbaugh? In my short life it seems hes the first guy that start this antiintellectualism xenophobia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dedfin said:

Did any Republican media personality do this before Limbaugh? In my short life it seems hes the first guy that start this antiintellectualism xenophobia.

William F. Buckley once said that he'd rather be governed by the first one hundred people in the Boston phone book than the Harvard faculty, so there's always been a strain of anti-intellectualism running through modern conservative thought, though that was more pith than seriousness. It's never been as bad as it is today.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ShamrockPride said:

Seems like identity politics are alive and well in the Democratic party...

I am always amused by comments like this when viewing pictures like this one

Or reading articles like:
https://www.businessinsider.com/changes-in-gender-racial-diversity-between-the-115th-and-116th-house-2018-12

 

Edited by The Commish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, prefontaine said:

Klobuchar is intriguing to me but it does seem she's going to need to thread the needle to come out on top. I could easily see her as everyone's top 3 but nobody's #1.

I bet if we did a poll here (maybe we already have?), she'd be lots of people's #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I bet if we did a poll here (maybe we already have?), she'd be lots of people's #1.

I'm not sure this sub-forum is a good representation of the primary voters at large. 

But you may well be right in the larger context. So far, polls don't suggest it, though obviously none have been taken since she announced, which should give her a nice boost. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda stale now but I find it impressive that Ted Lieu endorsed Kamela Harris, very quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I listened to part of that speech. 

I know lots of people love Beto’s speaking style but it doesnt do anything for me. He sounds...fake. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The General said:

Beto's crowd looked bigger than Trump's.

The orange one will not like that.

Nor will he admit it...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The General said:

Beto's crowd looked bigger than Trump's.

The orange one will not like that.

Really? Lol Free Republic was running with a Gateway Pundit article earlier that said 22,000 people showed up for Trump, less than 100 for Beto. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sho nuff said:

Nor will he admit it...

Saw that Trump was touting the number of people who requested free tickets online as his number :lol:

Never fails to amaze me at how much a fool he is.

 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Really? Lol Free Republic was running with a Gateway Pundit article earlier that said 22,000 people showed up for Trump, less than 100 for Beto. 

Bolded your problems...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

No way. You think Gateway Pundit made that up? 

Not too familiar with Gateway Pundit...Trump's place only held 6,500 people.

Guarantee this is what Trump will be most concerned with. Crowd size is his thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, timschochet said:

No fake is not the right word.

I have no earthly idea why you'd associate the word "fake" with a guy named Robert Francis O'Rourke who calls himself Beto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Yeah I listened to part of that speech. 

I know lots of people love Beto’s speaking style but it doesnt do anything for me. He sounds...fake. 

Very much "youth pastor at the local ministry", imo. I get how people dig him but I also think he's not ready for the national stage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, The General said:

Not too familiar with Gateway Pundit...Trump's place only held 6,500 people.

Guarantee this is what Trump will be most concerned with. Crowd size is his thing.

Gateway Pundit reporting is the total shizz! White House-credentialed and everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, roadkill1292 said:

Gateway Pundit reporting is the total shizz! White House-credentialed and everything.

I checked it out. May need to bleach my MacBook, was fighting off popups and blocking content left and right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The General said:

I checked it out. May need to bleach my MacBook, was fighting off popups and blocking content left and right.

It might be my fault for giving you the wrong impression. Gateway Pundit tickles my funny bone with its Mayberryesque amateurishness. But they do love and support their president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, roadkill1292 said:

It might be my fault for giving you the wrong impression. Gateway Pundit tickles my funny bone with its Mayberryesque amateurishness. But they do love and support their president.

There was a great link to "Ben Carson's Miracle Memory Enhancer Hits Shelves Today!" :lol:

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kyle Griffin‏Verified account @kylegriffin1 3m3 minutes ago

Chuck Schumer met with Beto O’Rourke last week to discuss a possible 2020 Senate campaign against Republican Sen. John Cornyn, a source familiar with the meeting tells Politico.

 

 

:lmao:  I suppose this is just another way of saying the DNC has chosen its nominee, and you are not going to get the backing of the establishment Dems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I suppose this is just another way of saying the DNC has chosen its nominee, and you are not going to get the backing of the establishment Dems.

Maybe to a degree. Beto is like 45 and appears to be a rising political star without an obvious path forward. He can't exactly sit on the sideline for 4-6 years and waste the capital he's built up.

But there's not much for him to run for. His seat in Congress is filled (by a Dem). He lost to the vulnerable Senator in Texas. Governor Abbott is popular and was just reelected so he can't run for that even til 2022. 

Cornyn is a tougher nut to crack than Cruz because well, he's not Ted Cruz. But I think Schumer has to ask. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, prefontaine said:

Cornyn is a tougher nut to crack than Cruz because well, he's not Ted Cruz. 

In isolation I agree with you but the electorate is generally different in midterms and in Presidential years.  Not clear yet whether that helps or hurts Beto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, prefontaine said:

Maybe to a degree. Beto is like 45 and appears to be a rising political star without an obvious path forward. He can't exactly sit on the sideline for 4-6 years and waste the capital he's built up.

But there's not much for him to run for. His seat in Congress is filled (by a Dem). He lost to the vulnerable Senator in Texas. Governor Abbott is popular and was just reelected so he can't run for that even til 2022. 

Cornyn is a tougher nut to crack than Cruz because well, he's not Ted Cruz. But I think Schumer has to ask. 

Maybe he could I’ve to Massachusetts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving day for the Dem candidates has been announced:

 

(CNN)The Democratic National Committee on Thursday announced details for the first two presidential primary debates of the 2020 cycle, with plans to hold each debate over two consecutive nights in anticipation of a large field of candidates.

The first debate will take place in June and the second one in July of 2019. NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo are set to partner on the June debate, and CNN is set to host the July event.

 

We will start to see the field shake out a bit after these first couple of debates - when people get a chance to see them all lined up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The format of these debates is interesting. Instead of holding a Varsity and JV debate like the GOP in ‘16, candidates are being chosen at random for each debate and you only need 1% support to get your name in the pool. That might be a good idea for the first couple debates, but once frontrunners get established I think they need to be on the stage together. I also foresee lots of dumb conspiracy theories about that random selection process.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

Moving day for the Dem candidates has been announced:

 

(CNN)The Democratic National Committee on Thursday announced details for the first two presidential primary debates of the 2020 cycle, with plans to hold each debate over two consecutive nights in anticipation of a large field of candidates.

The first debate will take place in June and the second one in July of 2019. NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo are set to partner on the June debate, and CNN is set to host the July event.

 

We will start to see the field shake out a bit after these first couple of debates - when people get a chance to see them all lined up.

Are the first debates always this early?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 8:09 PM, prefontaine said:

I don't normally pay much attention this early. I won't vote in the primary and so for the most part, it' s not all that important to me. But for some reason this cycle I'm paying attention to a few of the Dem candidates.

Klobuchar is intriguing to me but it does seem she's going to need to thread the needle to come out on top. I could easily see her as everyone's top 3 but nobody's #1. And as Trump showed (as opposed to Jeb!), having a hard base is more important in big fields than wide, tepid support. 

Why not vote in the primary?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld may challenge Trump for GOP nomination.

One interesting thing CNN mentioned:

Quote

History shows that presidents generally only face serious primary challenges when their approval rating within their own party is at 75% or below. Trump is currently far above this threshold. Trump recently scored an 89% approval rating among Republicans nationally in a Gallup poll. 

I'm a little skeptical about that. Trump's a very different kind of president and many historical trends will be less predictive in his case. Furthermore, the "my team vs their team" crap in our country is so strong that I suspect a big chuck of that 89% is more "I approve of my Republican president" than "I'd rather have Trump instead of <some other Republican> as President".

 

Having said that, I don't think Bill Weld poses a serious challenge. Maybe not Kasich or anyone else, either. But it would be interesting to see them try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VandyMan said:

It looks like Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld may challenge Trump for GOP nomination.

One interesting thing CNN mentioned:

I'm a little skeptical about that. Trump's a very different kind of president and many historical trends will be less predictive in his case. Furthermore, the "my team vs their team" crap in our country is so strong that I suspect a big chuck of that 89% is more "I approve of my Republican president" than "I'd rather have Trump instead of <some other Republican> as President".

 

Having said that, I don't think Bill Weld poses a serious challenge. Maybe not Kasich or anyone else, either. But it would be interesting to see them try.

I don't think Trump faces a serious challenge.

 

What might be challenging for the GOP - if Trump drops out of the race late into primary season, and they go to the convention needing to choose a candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barring the odd Reagan challenging the un-elected Ford, running against a sitting President is a sure fire way to kill any and all political future. 

And the only way to get any traction is if you can differentiate yourself from the President on a key issue people can rally around and reject the President's view. So a few off the top of my head are

1) Deficit Hawk - near as I can tell this is not a concern in the GOP anymore. But it's a clear area that someone could run on. 

2) Unpopular foreign conflict - we don't have one right not per se, or at least not something that is in the forefront. But the Khashoggi situation could lead to a clear demarcation with regard to the Saudis. Potentially the pull out in Syria or Afghanistan but it's hard to see either escalating in public consciousness. And of course an actual war would of course be controversial. 

3) It's the Economy stupid - if the US economy starts to show weakness, I could definitely see someone attacking the poor stewardship here. If in 4Q we start to see weakening, someone could emerge in 2020 as a Monetarist, which has significant, long-standing appeal in the GOP. 

4) Corruption. If the Mueller report is released and has damning but conflicting evidence that the President committed criminal actions,  or some other scandal breaks, we could see someone emerge to be a Coolidge (straight laced conservative) to Trump's Harding (scandal plagued administration).  

There are likely a few others but these are the things that stand out to me as potentially having traction. But outside of #1, none of them fit at the moment so it's hard to see anyone making it a serious race. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, prefontaine said:

Barring the odd Reagan challenging the un-elected Ford, running against a sitting President is a sure fire way to kill any and all political future. 

 

Bill Weld is like 70 or something I think he'll be OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found out Beto O'Rourke is 46? That's kinda surprising. He acts.....much younger. :oldunsure: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2019 at 11:04 AM, prefontaine said:

Cornyn is a tougher nut to crack than Cruz because well, he's not Ted Cruz.

I thought that too, but as of June 2018, Cornyn had 27% total approval and Cruz had 39%.

Of course, Cruz had much higher disapprove numbers, but it's easier to get your supporters to the polls than it is to hope people really want to vote against your opponent.

O'Rourke certainly has supporters, while the numbers for Cornyn look uninspiring.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, jamny said:

Just found out Beto O'Rourke is 46? That's kinda surprising. He acts.....much younger. :oldunsure: 

Lol, maybe it's the skateboarding. I suppose some people think it makes him "hip". I'd throw out the "ph" word that rhymes with "Tony" but I don't want to light another firestorm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Clayton Gray said:

I thought that too, but as of June 2018, Cornyn had 27% total approval and Cruz had 39%.

Of course, Cruz had much higher disapprove numbers, but it's easier to get your supporters to the polls than it is to hope people really want to vote against your opponent.

O'Rourke certainly has supporters, while the numbers for Cornyn look uninspiring.

Interesting. I notice Cornyn's bounced pretty high in Oct which I assume is just the election. So that makes me wonder if Cruz bounced earlier due to campaigning. 

But either way, it shows Cornyn is more vulnerable than I suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.