Democrats - What's The Goal In November? (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

@Jefferson the Caregiver wrote in another thread regarding Joe Biden:  "Its not about competance though because I agree with you, Biden is not the best candidate if that's how we are judging.  I don't think it matters though, he still has the best chance to beat Trump."

I agree. This to me is what it comes down to. 

I'm not saying other people are wrong - I'm saying I think there's a fundamental difference in opinion on how people are defining what the "goal of the game" is.

A great many smart people think the "goal of the game" in November is to put forth the best Democrat that would be a great President. 

I lean more towards the "goal of the game" is to put forth the best Democrat that can beat President Trump. 

And I know goals are rarely "all or nothing". It's often a mix. So I gave some options. 

 

[CentralPA]

Voted 0%/100% beat Trump mainly because I think just about anyone could be a better president.

 

[MAC_32]

N/A, the objective is to identify someone who can plug the gaps (not necessarily fix) the fractures between the left and moderate lanes. The secondary goal is down ballot. 

Regardless of what you think about point one, point two is why Bernie was never optimal imho

 

[Sinn Fein]

Its an awkwardly phrased question.  I think many people would say that 100% of the goal is to put forth the best candidate, who will then beat Trump.  (And/or they would define the best president as the one who could beat Trump)

The question seems to suppose that these are mutually exclusive options.

My personal assumption is that any Dem candidate can beat Trump - which is 100% my main goal.  But, within those parameters, I will choose who I think will make the best president of the remaining candidates, and that is 100% of the choice I ultimately make when I vote in the primary.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

.

Yo!  Nice to see you GB!

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Hey now @Sinn Fein welcome back.

I didn’t vote because I’m not a Democrat, but am interested in the discussion. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Its an awkwardly phrased question.  I think many people would say that 100% of the goal is to put forth the best candidate, who will then beat Trump.  (And/or they would define the best president as the one who could beat Trump)

The question seems to suppose that these are mutually exclusive options.

My personal assumption is that any Dem candidate can beat Trump - which is 100% my main goal.  But, within those parameters, I will choose who I think will make the best president of the remaining candidates, and that is 100% of the choice I ultimately make when I vote in the primary.

Sure. No poll is perfect by any stretch and I don't disagree it could be better. Was just trying to get a feel for how folks saw the mix as "electability" seems like a big topic.

You're welcome to create your own poll. 

 

[Kal El]

Hey now @Sinn Fein welcome back.

I didn’t vote because I’m not a Democrat, but am interested in the discussion. 

I'm here in this boat as well, but usually the idea is to put forth a candidate who can defeat the incumbent.

 

[roadkill1292]

We can't move forward as a nation until we rid ourselves of the hateful incompetent currently in the White House. After that, whether they realize it or not, we can start doing things for everyone, including our conservative opponents.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

100% Put forth the candidate that will make the best President.

 

[BobbyLayne]

The establishment pulled a four alarm fire because they were sure Sanders was unelectable.

Biden is gonna get creamed in November. 

 

[timschochet]

Biden is gonna get creamed in November. 

Why do you think so? 

 

[timschochet]

The establishment pulled a four alarm fire because they were sure Sanders was unelectable.

I also have to add that it’s amazing to me that, just as in 2016, black voters in the South are suddenly the same as “the establishment.” 

 

[tommyGunZ]

I also have to add that it’s amazing to me that, just as in 2016, black voters in the South are suddenly the same as “the establishment.” 

Haven’t you figured it out yet?  The “establishment” is anyone who doesn’t agree with the Sanders/Gabbard/AOC left. 

 

[tommyGunZ]

Hey now @Sinn Fein welcome back.

This.  One of the best poster on these boards.  

 

[dozer]

The establishment pulled a four alarm fire because they were sure Sanders was unelectable.

Biden is gonna get creamed in November. 

When you say Biden will get creamed, what percent of the Vote do you think he’ll get?

like, 30% or something?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Goal #1 - Is to oust Trump and as much of the enabling GOP in the House and Senate as possible.  (And wherever else they may occupy).

Goal #2- Is to "right the ship".  Just like 2009.  Just like 1993.   Just like 1977.

Goal #3 - Is to push the nation forward.  We will barely scratch the surface because as soon as goal #2 is more or less achieved the country will vote for the next round of tax cuts and the cycle starts all over again.

The problem with the poll question is that the best president is the one that achieves these goals which means that the correct answer is 100%/100%.   Now the problem as a primary voter today is that I'm torn as to which candidate best achieves these goals.   On the surface Biden is running on goals 1 and 2 and Sanders is running on goals 1 and 3.  Each have a conflicting claim to how they alone achieve goal #1 where I think most years the edge would go to Sanders but this isn't most years.  Like it or not I think a president Sanders is going to spend most of his time "trapped" in "righting the ship" which will frustrate him and his supporters.   I don't think either get much accomplished towards goal #3 but Sanders will push harder using the bully pulpit.  I'm still torn as to which lever should be pulled today.  But even worse, I have no idea how to represent this in one of the poll choices - even if it wasn't already really difficult for me to think in such terms as the answers require.

Sorry

 

[Navin Johnson]

Haven’t you figured it out yet?  The “establishment” is anyone who doesn’t agree with the Sanders/Gabbard/AOC left. 

Basically anyone who hasn't been labeled a Russian asset.  When all you got is a hammer...

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

These poll results show exactly why the Democratic nomination process has been a giant mess and why we're possibly going to end up with an uninspiring nominee experiencing cognitive decline.

 

[timschochet]

and as much of the enabling GOP in the House and Senate as possible.  

I’m glad you mentioned this. For those of us Democrats who care about movement on specific issues of immediate concern: (climate change, gun control, protecting Obamacare, etc) the Down ballot races are nearly equal to the Presidential race, and I don’t believe that anyone can rationally argue that Bernie Sanders will help the Democrats in Congress win elections as much as Joe Biden will. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

When you say Biden will get creamed, what percent of the Vote do you think he’ll get?

like, 30% or something?

like, <270

only took him 32 years of running for POTUS to win a state

IMO he’s an even worse candidate than HRC, which is not an easy achievement 

perceived safe choice but he’s a bumbling dufus who is out of teach with the electorate 

 

[BassNBrew]

The results of this poll reflect why we keep getting bad candidates on Democratic side

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

like, <270

only took him 32 years of running for POTUS to win a state

IMO he’s an even worse candidate than HRC, which is not an easy achievement 

perceived safe choice but he’s a bumbling dufus who is out of teach with the electorate 

Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden.  All cut from the same cloth.

 

[BobbyLayne]

I also have to add that it’s amazing to me that, just as in 2016, black voters in the South are suddenly the same as “the establishment.” 

TBC I think you specifically mean black women - the church ladies def have heavy influence over the party establishment 

 

[CentralPA]

Biden won't get creamed but still don't see how he beats Trump.  I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Workhorse]

For me, it leans towards the "whomever can beat Trump" with one additional variable: Whomever can beat Trump AND have coattails long enough to flip the Senate/keep the House.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden.  All cut from the same cloth.

wwcd 

sick of it

not sick enough to vote for a lunatic in November but deeply disappointing 

 

[timschochet]

Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden.  All cut from the same cloth.

And all of them would defeat Donald Trump in 2020. Yes that includes Hillary though she’d have the toughest time of it. 

 

[Workhorse]

like, <270

only took him 32 years of running for POTUS to win a state

IMO he’s an even worse candidate than HRC, which is not an easy achievement 

perceived safe choice but he’s a bumbling dufus who is out of teach with the electorate 

Biden polls well in the following constituencies:  Suburban moderates, older voters, African-Americans.

Three CRITICAL voting blocs where turnout is important every four years, like clockwork. As opposed to Bernie's strengths in young voters and the disaffected working-class - Not always the most stable voting groups in Presidential years. I'd take my chances with the former vs. the latter, but that's just me.

 

[The General]

like, <270

only took him 32 years of running for POTUS to win a state

IMO he’s an even worse candidate than HRC, which is not an easy achievement 

perceived safe choice but he’s a bumbling dufus who is out of teach with the electorate 

Ouch 

 

[Sinn Fein]

and why we're possibly going to end up with an uninspiring nominee experiencing cognitive decline.

I think that ship has sailed.

 

[identikit]

Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden.  All cut from the same cloth.

And all of them would defeat Donald Trump in 2020. Yes that includes Hillary though she’d have the toughest time of it. 

How about Dukakis?

Mondale?

 

[roadkill1292]

These poll results show exactly why the Democratic nomination process has been a giant mess and why we're possibly going to end up with an uninspiring nominee experiencing cognitive decline.

There are lots of good ideas out there for positively revamping the process (and elections in general). It's too bad that Democratic party officials never seem to have or to hear any of them.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Goal #1 - preserve democracy and prevent us from sliding into Venezuela or Zimbabwe territory of failed nations

Goal #2 - solve real, systemic problems that exist today

 

[Joe Bryant]

Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden.  All cut from the same cloth.

Do you think they would have been good Presidents? Or for Biden, would be a good President?

 

[Workhorse]

How about Dukakis?

Mondale?

McGovern too.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

McGovern too.

McGovern might be able to beat Trump, but his running mate choice would probably be a bigger deal than most.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Do you think they would make good Presidents?

I think Gore, Kerry and Clinton would have all been competent but not particularly inspiring Presidents.  I'm concerned about Biden's mental faculties so I'll wait to answer on that one.  My point, though, was that the party converged around these candidates due in large part to perceived electability.  People are really awful at judging electability.

 

[kface]

I don't know if I'm allowed to answer because I'm not a democrat by any stretch of the imagination but all I want out this election is to change the discourse in this country. It does nobody good (republicans or democrats) to have a president that models the behavior of a bully, that calls people names, that acts only in his own self interests, that literally spends most of his time whipping up hatred.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I think Gore, Kerry and Clinton would have all been competent but not particularly inspiring Presidents.  I'm concerned about Biden's mental faculties so I'll wait to answer on that one.  My point, though, was that the party converged around these candidates due in large part to perceived electability.  People are really awful at judging electability.

Thanks. 

I do wonder about the bolded. Can you elaborate more and why you think what you think?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't know if I'm allowed to answer because I'm not a democrat by any stretch of the imagination but all I want out this election is to change the discourse in this country. It does nobody good (republicans or democrats) to have a president that models the behavior of a bully, that calls people names, that acts only in his own self interests, that literally spends most of his time whipping up hatred.

Your thoughts are always welcome. This specific question is about Democrats but the big picture question is the same for both parties in a year where they're trying to get their nominee.

I think lots of people in 2016 could have argued Trump was more like Bernie on the electability scale as he was more extreme. Clearly that worked for Republicans. 

It's an interesting issue I think. 

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I think Gore, Kerry and Clinton would have all been competent but not particularly inspiring Presidents.  I'm concerned about Biden's mental faculties so I'll wait to answer on that one.  My point, though, was that the party converged around these candidates due in large part to perceived electability.  People are really awful at judging electability.

The party converged on them more as “lifetime achievement award candidates”, because no other exceptional candidate appeared on the horizon.   The DNC loves to reward lifetime loyalty, and thus the party has often defaulted to “lifetime award nominees.”   The Republicans have also done this - Bush Sr, Dole, McCain....

Notice the pattern?  This type of candidate rarely wins the general election.  Bush Sr won, but only because he faced even more inept Dukakis (who shouldn’t have and wouldn’t have been the nominee......if not for the Gary Hart scandal).

 

[Summer Wheat]

There is no best "best candidate" left in the field.    So I guess it is beat Trump.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Thanks. 

I do wonder about the bolded. Can you elaborate more and why you think what you think?

Part of the reason I think people are terrible at assessing electability, particularly in Presidential races, comes just from my anecdotal observations of politics over the last 20 years or so.  The Democrats went with John Kerry over Howard Dean primarily because people viewed him as more electable.  All the Republicans were freaked out in 2016 as Trump gained steam in the primaries because most people viewed HIM as unelectable.  Lots of people on this board last time around advocated for Hillary over Bernie specifically because of electability.

Now, it's impossible to go back in time to see what would have happened if Dems had gone with Dean in 2004 or Bernie in 2016, or if the Republicans had gone with someone like Marco Rubio in 2016.  But the very fact that we have substantial numbers of people here at FBGs arguing that Biden is the most electable, while other folks argue just as hard that Bernie is more electable, is a pretty good indication that we just don't have a particularly good handle on what makes someone electable in the first place.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Part of the reason I think people are terrible at assessing electability, particularly in Presidential races, comes just from my anecdotal observations of politics over the last 20 years or so.  The Democrats went with John Kerry over Howard Dean primarily because people viewed him as more electable.  All the Republicans were freaked out in 2016 as Trump gained steam in the primaries because most people viewed HIM as unelectable.  Lots of people on this board last time around advocated for Hillary over Bernie specifically because of electability.

Now, it's impossible to go back in time to see what would have happened if Dems had gone with Dean in 2004 or Bernie in 2016, or if the Republicans had gone with someone like Marco Rubio in 2016.  But the very fact that we have substantial numbers of people here at FBGs arguing that Biden is the most electable, while other folks argue just as hard that Bernie is more electable, is a pretty good indication that we just don't have a particularly good handle on what makes someone electable in the first place.

Thanks GB

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I'm echoing a couple points further up but I voted 90/10 best. I realize it's sort of a false option, but IMO best president as candidate will take of beating Trump and horse race politics as a strategy for a party or as an individual deciding who to vote for is doomed to failure. And I'm not just saying that because of 2016 but my own local politics, state and city/parish.

 

[TheMagus]

The results of this poll reflect why we keep getting bad candidates on Democratic side

Voted 30/70. My vote would have been 100/0, but Pete dropped out of the race this weekend. I think he would have made the best president, helped keep the House, and also beat Trump. This is all IMHO of course. Now that he's gone, I'm looking to back whoever I feel is more likely to beat Trump and at this point I think that is Biden. And I also think Biden would make a better president than Bloomberg or Sanders.

It is what it is I suppose. We still have a lot of people in this country favoring the "old guard" so to speak.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Thanks GB

I just thought of another good example.  In 2008, there were a significant number of Democrats that shied away from supporting Obama at first due to the perception that a black guy with a Muslim-sounding name had no chance to win.  Even black voters in South Carolina didn't support him until after he won Iowa and proved that white people would vote for him. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Part of the reason I think people are terrible at assessing electability, particularly in Presidential races, comes just from my anecdotal observations of politics over the last 20 years or so.  The Democrats went with John Kerry over Howard Dean primarily because people viewed him as more electable.  All the Republicans were freaked out in 2016 as Trump gained steam in the primaries because most people viewed HIM as unelectable.  Lots of people on this board last time around advocated for Hillary over Bernie specifically because of electability.

Now, it's impossible to go back in time to see what would have happened if Dems had gone with Dean in 2004 or Bernie in 2016, or if the Republicans had gone with someone like Marco Rubio in 2016.  But the very fact that we have substantial numbers of people here at FBGs arguing that Biden is the most electable, while other folks argue just as hard that Bernie is more electable, is a pretty good indication that we just don't have a particularly good handle on what makes someone electable in the first place.

This is really just speculation on my part, but I think Bernie would have lost to Trump in 2016, and somebody like Rubio would have beaten either Hillary or Bernie pretty handily.  (Not a landslide or anything, but not the squeaker that Trump pulled out).

I agree with you that people wildly miscalculated on Kerry -- I remember that election too, and you are right that "electability" was seen as his biggest strength.  Whoops.

 

[squistion]

The greatest candidate in the world means absolutely nothing if he or she can't beat Trump. That is the top priority as IMO there will be irreparable damage done to this country with another 4 years of Trump (just based on the SCOTUS replacements alone).