What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Democratic Party worried their candidates might not be good enough to beat Trump? (1 Viewer)

Peter Savodnik wrote an article in Vanity Fair about Democratic unease with their own candidates' electability. This has been going on for at least eight months. Nothing new. I personally am not going to be able to support any of the current Democratic candidates that I've heard, seen, or witnessed.

It's bad.

 
Joe Mammy said:
Tennessee Republicans worry me.
Click to expand...
This is of course the very wrong way to go about these things but I've questioned on this board before whether America is truly ready for an openly gay President.  I say no.  I don't think we are there yet.  There are far too many people in the USA that are religious and this goes against their beliefs...strongly.   I think we are maybe 10 years out from that being something accepted at that level.

 
Any of them are better options than Trump. I’d prefer a moderate so that would be Biden, Pete, Klobacher. I’ll take Sanders as he’d smoke Trump as well.Warren would win I’m guessing as well but would be the best shot for donald.

Hopefully he’s impeached before the election and the topic of these articles can change to who can beat Pence.

 
The General said:
Any of them are better options than Trump.

Hopefully he’s impeached before the election and the topic of these articles can change to who can beat Pence.
Click to expand...
I have voted for presidential candidates from both parties and even third party.  This time I will vote for anyone the Democrats put up against Trump.   He must be removed from office even if it means Elizabeth Warren.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You guys aren't really answering the question though.   It is clear that the majority of this board will vote for whomever they can to unseat President Trump.  That part is established.  What I am asking is does it concern you that the democrat party could potentially not feel very confident in the current candidates ability to defeat the President?

 
I honestly think that for all the intelligence we have on the board, the board is myopic when it tries to see what the general public sees. That's why you have The Great Poll Debates all the time. They can't possibly conceive of any rational citizen voting for Trump and justifying their decision with anything but fear, anger, racism, prejudice, etc. The board knows that so many people can't be motivated by that, therefore, they must not exist.

I don't think people are worried about the fundamentals of the electoral process; they come to vent. Think of how's tim is viewed as a moderate and is treated by people on his own side. It's sort of funny, the disconnect between this board and the general population. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
supermike80 said:
You guys aren't really answering the question though.   It is clear that the majority of this board will vote for whomever they can to unseat President Trump.  That part is established.  What I am asking is does it concern you that the democrat party could potentially not feel very confident in the current candidates ability to defeat the President?
Click to expand...
Potentially not feel very confident?

Really?

 
I said from the start it was a weak field, but what other options do we have?   There is no cohesive message as the party is going in different directions.  I also stated the only ones who can blow this elections is the dem themselves.  That is why I am a little concerned about this impeachment process.   Right now Trump can`t do much anyway and only has a year left so ride it out and start getting some important bills passed.  Congress has really done nothing other than Trump stuff.   So even if a Dem wins we could lose congress again and one step forward two steps back.

 
rockaction said:
I honestly think that for all the intelligence we have on the board, the board is myopic when it tries to see what the general public sees. That's why you have The Great Poll Debates all the time. They can't possibly conceive of any rational citizen voting for Trump and justifying their decision with anything but fear, anger, racism, prejudice, etc. The board knows that so many people can't be motivated by that, therefore, they must not exist.

I don't think people are worried about the fundamentals of the electoral process; they come to vent. Think of how's tim is viewed as a moderate and is treated by people on his own side. It's sort of funny, the disconnect between this board and the general population. 
Click to expand...
I'm getting the same answers over and over again.

To me, it would be concerning if the democratic party, the ones that might know more than most about this process, and certainly would know more than this bored, says they are nervous.  

And this was published in the New York Times.  Not FOX...I would assume if it was published by FOX the board would be pooh pooh-ing it.

 
Summer Wheat said:
I said from the start it was a weak field, but what other options do we have?   There is no cohesive message as the party is going in different directions.  I also stated the only ones who can blow this elections is the dem themselves.  That is why I am a little concerned about this impeachment process.   Right now Trump can`t do much anyway and only has a year left so ride it out and start getting some important bills passed.  Congress has really done nothing other than Trump stuff.   So even if a Dem wins we could lose congress again and one step forward two steps back.
Click to expand...
Is there a candidate out there, sitting on the sideline, that anyone feels here could come in as a late addition and improve the odds of beating President Trump?

Names mentioned include

Hillary(of course)

Michelle Obama

Bloomberg

Anyone else?    Oprah?

 
rockaction said:
I honestly think that for all the intelligence we have on the board, the board is myopic when it tries to see what the general public sees. That's why you have The Great Poll Debates all the time. They can't possibly conceive of any rational citizen voting for Trump and justifying their decision with anything but fear, anger, racism, prejudice, etc. The board knows that so many people can't be motivated by that, therefore, they must not exist.

I don't think people are worried about the fundamentals of the electoral process; they come to vent. Think of how's tim is viewed as a moderate and is treated by people on his own side. It's sort of funny, the disconnect between this board and the general population. 
Click to expand...
I do agree somewhat but the sample size here is very small because not many people post in the PSF other than the same regulars day in and day out with the same views.  I posted this before but I encounter many different people everyday and nobody talks about the stuff that goes on in this forum. 

 
 Gabbard is the only one who worries me, but I do still wish Tim Waltz would somehow jump into the race. He is still my dream candidate. 

 
supermike80 said:
Still

Not

Answering

the 

Question
Click to expand...
I just answered it twice.

These candidates are all better than Trump, Warren would make me the most nervous in terms of winning an election. Regardless, these articles come out every 4 years regarding worries beating the incumbent. Every candidate is beating Trump head to head at the moment. 

Is some candidate going to jump in, who knows? 

 
Summer Wheat said:
I do agree somewhat but the sample size here is very small because not many people post in the PSF other than the same regulars day in and day out with the same views.  I posted this before but I encounter many different people everyday and nobody talks about the stuff that goes on in this forum. 
Click to expand...
I think Joe has tried to gently say that and people have been a little myopic in conceptualizing that they are indeed the one percent of the population who deals with this stuff that in-depth and that passionately and fervently. 

 
supermike80 said:
Is there a candidate out there, sitting on the sideline, that anyone feels here could come in as a late addition and improve the odds of beating President Trump?

Names mentioned include

Hillary(of course)

Michelle Obama

Bloomberg

Anyone else?    Oprah?
Click to expand...
Oprah?? No way.  We don't need another TV personality.  Hillary has already lost a couple of times and is viewed as an unlikeable canidate.  I think what you see is what we get from here on in.    If we are going for a woman I prefer Amy much better than Warren and am hoping she can gain some traction. Men side Mayor Pete.      Actually a Pete-Amy, Amy-Pete would be a good match.  But that won`t appease the hard liners.

 
badmojo1006 said:
The question is so broad and so hypothetical I could answer yes or no and be correct 
Click to expand...
Well of course you could.  Is that some kind of a joke or something.  It really is a question that could be answered with a yes or a no--and still be correct.   Good gracious.

:wall:   

 
Summer Wheat said:
Oprah?? No way.  We don't need another TV personality.  Hillary has already lost a couple of times and is viewed as an unlikeable canidate.  I think what you see is what we get from here on in.    If we are going for a woman I prefer Amy much better than Warren and am hoping she can gain some traction. Men side Mayor Pete.      Actually a Pete-Amy, Amy-Pete would be a good match.  But that won`t appease the hard liners.
Click to expand...
Ok what is this "if we are going for a woman" Aren't we going for one of two things? 1) a candidate who represents my opinions / values / needs from the executive office or 2) One that can at least unseat the current President?   Dems "went for a woman" last time and it hurt them terribly.

 
supermike80 said:
You guys aren't really answering the question though.   It is clear that the majority of this board will vote for whomever they can to unseat President Trump.  That part is established.  What I am asking is does it concern you that the democrat party could potentially not feel very confident in the current candidates ability to defeat the President?
Click to expand...
Yes, sure.  But there are a lot of things that worry me.  It's possible that Trump will win reelection, without a doubt.  My guess, though, is Democrats will rally behind one of the current candidates and he/she is likely to win.

 
I'm admittedly a bit fuzzy on which issues the candidates are heavy on, but I feel that a more moderate Democrat would gain a significant amount of independent voters like myself, who lean mostly libertarian with a few conservative issues, but open minded enough to at least listen.

 
Juxtatarot said:
Yes, sure.  But there are a lot of things that worry me.  It's possible that Trump will win reelection, without a doubt.  My guess, though, is Democrats will rally behind one of the current candidates and he/she is likely to win.
Click to expand...
God. Thank you for answering.  Seriously.  

I don't know..it scares me a bit, partially cause I have really felt this way since the candidates started to come out.  

 
From the article:

"One longtime Democrat who originally sought to entice Brown into the race, Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, could not help letting out a loud “oy!” when asked about the possibility of another candidate joining the sprawling field. “For as long as I have been in politics, I’ve heard Democrats fretting about their presidential contenders,” Weingarten said."

and

"Deval Patrick, the former Massachusetts governor, who also weighed a campaign run before deciding not to, said he too has been nudged by friends to reconsider. “It’s nice to be rumored about,” he said, before notably refusing to rule out a last-minute entry. “Don’t ask me that question,” he said. But Patrick suggested an 11th-hour bid was highly unlikely and had a message for increasingly angst-ridden Democrats: “Everybody needs to calm down, it’s early. It’s so early.”

 
supermike80 said:
God. Thank you for answering.  Seriously.  

I don't know..it scares me a bit, partially cause I have really felt this way since the candidates started to come out.  
Click to expand...
I haven't been thrilled with the candidates either.   They all have baggage that could make undecided voters stick with Trump but my hope is that those people have seen the disaster over the past 2+ years and vote for the Democrat anyway.

 
supermike80 said:
Ok what is this "if we are going for a woman" Aren't we going for one of two things? 1) a candidate who represents my opinions / values / needs from the executive office or 2) One that can at least unseat the current President?   Dems "went for a woman" last time and it hurt them terribly.
Click to expand...
Well..it is politics 2020.  Just the way it is and we have little control

 
First off nobody’s jumping in. It never happens in modern political history and it’s not going to happen this time. For one thing the rules (getting your name put on the ballot in certain key states) are too strict. So what we got now is what we’ll have. 

Second, the article is hiding the real concern among donors which comes down to these two points: 

1. Warren is too far to the left to beat Trump. 

2. Biden is turning out to be too weak to beat Warren. 

In a nutshell, Democratic donors, including many from Wall Street, are concerned that Warren or Bernie can’t beat Trump, and also they don’t like their ideas. But that begs the question: can Biden maintain his lead among blacks? Or do they go with another moderate: Buttigieg or Klobuchar? Or if they DO start favoring one of those two will that in turn split the centrist vote and give Warren the nomination? 

 
Godsbrother said:
I haven't been thrilled with the candidates either.   They all have baggage that could make undecided voters stick with Trump but my hope is that those people have seen the disaster over the past 2+ years and vote for the Democrat anyway.
Click to expand...
I think every candidate has baggage.  That's not the concern for me really.  I just see the party kind of saying "Shoot, our candidates suck" and that's not a good place to be.

 
timschochet said:
First off nobody’s jumping in. It never happens in modern political history and it’s not going to happen this time. For one thing the rules (getting your name put on the ballot in certain key states) are too strict. So what we got now is what we’ll have. 

Second, the article is hiding the real concern among donors which comes down to these two points: 

1. Warren is too far to the left to beat Trump. 

2. Biden is turning out to be too weak to beat Warren. 

In a nutshell, Democratic donors, including many from Wall Street, are concerned that Warren or Bernie can’t beat Trump, and also they don’t like their ideas. But that begs the question: can Biden maintain his lead among blacks? Or do they go with another moderate: Buttigieg or Klobuchar? Or if they DO start favoring one of those two will that in turn split the centrist vote and give Warren the nomination? 
Click to expand...
Why does Biden have a black lead by the way? because of his ties to Obama? What does Biden provide that others dont?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
supermike80 said:
Why does Biden have a black lead by the way? because of his ties to Obama? What does Biden provide that others dont?
Click to expand...
1. Ties to Obama. 

2. Name recognition. 

3. Historically most black Americans are Democrat by party (since 1964) and conservative by outlook- they almost always support the most established, traditional, conservative candidate on the board. 

 
supermike80 said:
I think every candidate has baggage.  That's not the concern for me really.  I just see the party kind of saying "Shoot, our candidates suck" and that's not a good place to be.
Click to expand...
There are no perfect candidates. This story is the NYT equivalent of “Hollywood Won’t Cast These Actors Anymore - Number 8 Will Shock You!” clickbait.

 
This garbage about there not being any good Dems must just be right wingers trying to sow dissent. There are a ton of good candidates in the Democratic field. Many that would likely make an excellent Pressident. And almost all of whom would be significantly better than Trump.

 
whoknew said:
This garbage about there not being any good Dems must just be right wingers trying to sow dissent. There are a ton of good candidates in the Democratic field. Many that would likely make an excellent Pressident. And almost all of whom would be significantly better than Trump.
Click to expand...
Probably could have gone with "No, I'm not worried"  but your conspiracy theory is noted.

 
I think it's highly likely that Trump loses in 2020.

I think it's a near certainty that whoever takes the oath of office in 2021 is somebody who I really don't think should be president.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
I think it's highly likely that Trump loses in 2020.

I think it's a near certainty that whoever takes the oath of office in 2021 is somebody who I really don't think should be president.
Click to expand...
How people are out there that you DO think should be President?  And who was the last one to take the oath that had you saying, yeah OK, this guy deserves it? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The General said:
There are no perfect candidates. This story is the NYT equivalent of “Hollywood Won’t Cast These Actors Anymore - Number 8 Will Shock You!” clickbait.
Click to expand...
Not really. Like I posted about four months ago, Vanity Fair did a long, in-depth article about exactly how worried donors were about the viability of the Democratic candidates. I posted in my thread, but got nary a nibble, other than from SID.

 
rockaction said:
Not really. Like I posted about four months ago, Vanity Fair did a long, in-depth article about exactly how worried donors were about the viability of the Democratic candidates. I posted in my thread, but got nary a nibble, other than from SID.
Click to expand...
Yeah.  I gave up.  

 
rockaction said:
Not really. Like I posted about four months ago, Vanity Fair did a long, in-depth article about exactly how worried donors were about the viability of the Democratic candidates. I posted in my thread, but got nary a nibble, other than from SID.
Click to expand...
Against a normal Republican it’s a weak field. Against this guy it works. 

 
rockaction said:
Not really. Like I posted about four months ago, Vanity Fair did a long, in-depth article about exactly how worried donors were about the viability of the Democratic candidates. I posted in my thread, but got nary a nibble, other than from SID.
Click to expand...
There had been hundreds of millions donated to dem candidness. This hand wringing happens every election and is akin to political sports talk radio where they talk about the MVP every week.

Yeah. all the candidates have weaknesses. The press is going to do their jobs and write about it.

 
timschochet said:
First off nobody’s jumping in. It never happens in modern political history and it’s not going to happen this time. For one thing the rules (getting your name put on the ballot in certain key states) are too strict. So what we got now is what we’ll have. 

Second, the article is hiding the real concern among donors which comes down to these two points: 

1. Warren is too far to the left to beat Trump. 

2. Biden is turning out to be too weak to beat Warren. 

In a nutshell, Democratic donors, including many from Wall Street, are concerned that Warren or Bernie can’t beat Trump, and also they don’t like their ideas. But that begs the question: can Biden maintain his lead among blacks? Or do they go with another moderate: Buttigieg or Klobuchar? Or if they DO start favoring one of those two will that in turn split the centrist vote and give Warren the nomination? 
Click to expand...
I am already disgruntled with the GOP but  this is another reason I am getting a little disgruntled with the Dem party as well.   We now have the black vote, the progressive vote, the centrist vote,the gay vote, the Hispanic vote, the liberal white vote, everything is just getting too diced up. America was supposed to melt together as one but that is not the case.

 
Godsbrother said:
I haven't been thrilled with the candidates either.   They all have baggage that could make undecided voters stick with Trump but my hope is that those people have seen the disaster over the past 2+ years and vote for the Democrat anyway.
Click to expand...
This Presidential election is likely to come down to which side gets their base to turn out more than who can capture the "middle". If the Democrats run a GOP-lite candidate they risk seeing a lot of their base stay home.

The Democratic nominee is going to be someone already in the race. There isn't anybody charismatic enough to gain traction or be able to raise enough money to compete. Any Democrat who isn't worried about another Trump Electoral College  is lying to themself.

 
The General said:
There had been hundreds of millions donated to dem candidness. This hand wringing happens every election and is akin to political sports talk radio where they talk about the MVP every week.

Yeah. all the candidates have weaknesses. The press is going to do their jobs and write about it.
Click to expand...
Sure, of course the hand-wringing goes on every election, but I think these were sort of insiders who were really concerned they might lose to Trump again. Half of that worry is because of the opponent, half of it seemed like they genuinely didn't like the people they were funding. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Do You Believe College Liberals Have Hijacked The Democratic Party? (5/19/22 7:43 PST)
2
Replies
77
Views
2K
BladeRunner
BladeRunner
GordonGekko
New York Times: "Will Asian Americans Bolt From The Democratic Party?" (6/20/22 23:20 PST)
Replies
36
Views
873
jon_mx
J
GordonGekko
OP/ED: Explaining Why Donald Trump Going To Prison Would Be Good For America (7/12/22 21:26 PST)
Replies
3
Views
341
GordonGekko
GordonGekko

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top