Democratic Party worried their candidates might not be good enough to beat Trump? (2 Viewers)

[supermike80]

No, because the party doesn't decide who the nominee is, the voters do.  Democratic voters are going to pick Elizabeth Warren.  Democratic big money donors and establishment types are going to wring their hands worried that she will lose.  But then she will win big.

How'd that work out in 2016?  Whats changed between now and then?  

 

[whoknew]

How'd that work out in 2016?  Whats changed between now and then?  

Not to answer for fatguy, but lots of things have changed.

Also Elizabeth Warren and Hillary are different people.

 

[-fish-]

Woah..easy big fella.  Take a breath.  I am not relying on anyone.

But based on your logic, is it safe to assume the next democratic nominee will also be a failure?   Your argument seems to say the party doesn't know what they are doing.   This doesn't help the confidence in beating the President in 2020.

I am on board with the thought that the party doesn't know what it is doing.   

 

[supermike80]

I am on board with the thought that the party doesn't know what it is doing.   

So let me see if I have this.  So the consensus is the democratic party doesn't know what it's doing? And somehow that disconnect is going to help them win the Presidency???

 

[-fish-]

How'd that work out in 2016?  Whats changed between now and then?  

Democratic establishment types and big money donors loved Hillary.   They don't like Warren.  Trying to compare her with Warren because they're both democrats and women is just lazy and uninformed.   

 

[[scooter]]

I think that every Democratic candidate has a fatal flaw which can be exploited by Trump (or any competent Republican candidate). It's a very weak field overall, almost like the kind of field that you would expect to see against a juggernaut opponent -- as if they're all expecting to lose, but they want to build up some momentum and publicity for their next Senate run.

Like being impeached? A history of rape and sexual assault allegations? A settlement for fraud? A history of bankruptcy? Too many racist statements to count? Accepting funds from sovereign nations? Stuff like that? 

Trump can defend against all of these things. The sexual misconduct (lies from women who just want publicity!), fraud (settled for way less than he could have lost!), bankruptcy (just smart business!), racist statements (I'm not racist, you're the racist!), funds from foreigners (everyone does it!).

But Biden and Sanders can't defend against being old, Warren can't defend against being pro-socialism, Mayor Pete can't defend against being gay and inexperienced, Harris can't defend against being an angry black woman, etc. The Trump campaign is going to exploit these stereotypes. And all they really need to do is to convince a small percentage of independent voters in a few key states to give Trump another 4 years.

 

[-fish-]

So let me see if I have this.  So the consensus is the democratic party doesn't know what it's doing? And somehow that disconnect is going to help them win the Presidency???

I don't know if that's the consensus, but I think without a strong candidate who brings his or her own message to the table, the party flounders.   The party wanted Hillary in 2008.  They got Obama because the voters liked him.   The party wanted Hillary in 2016, and didn't see the support for Bernie coming, nor the backlash to what appeared to be a rigged system.   

Now, what is the party's message?   Free health care?   Student loan forgiveness?   Everyone I know only cares about getting Trump out, but that's not the message.  We have a muddled mess of entitlements instead.   Biden seemed like the guy that could run on being moderate and beating Trump, but he seems like he's losing it.   Once the nominee is set, there should be some unity of message, but for right now the stupid debates with a dozen people on stage at once are a pretty good demonstration of where the party seems to be.

 

[rockaction]

I don't know if that's the consensus, but I think without a strong candidate who brings his or her own message to the table, the party flounders.   The party wanted Hillary in 2008.  They got Obama because the voters liked him.   The party wanted Hillary in 2016, and didn't see the support for Bernie coming, nor the backlash to what appeared to be a rigged system.   

Now, what is the party's message?   Free health care?   Student loan forgiveness?   Everyone I know only cares about getting Trump out, but that's not the message.  We have a muddled mess of entitlements instead.   Biden seemed like the guy that could run on being moderate and beating Trump, but he seems like he's losing it.   Once the nominee is set, there should be some unity of message, but for right now the stupid debates with a dozen people on stage at once are a pretty good demonstration of where the party seems to be.

I think the "muddled mess of entitlements" wording is a really astute way of putting how somebody like me sees their campaigns and their policy proposals. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Many of us were concerned about Hillary's electability.  I will concede that my concerns diminished a lot after Trump won the Republican nomination because I thought he would be easy to beat. 

The GOP gets the "no way" guys elected president much more often than "the next guy in line".  They get the "you won't have me to kick around any longer".   They get the [alleged] "coke head" elected.  They get the B movie, divorcee actor elected.   They get the guy everyone thought was a democrat to win (stretched a bit for this one).   They get elected the guys that everyone says "no way" when they hear they are running.  Saying this in August of 2015 was considered trolling from all sides as "no way" will that reality show guy become president.  No way that anyone could think it is a threat.  No way!