Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

2020 Democratic Presidential Straw Poll


Juxtatarot

Pick one  

141 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:
1 hour ago, Mister CIA said:

Biden: While I want to discount Mr. Joe, he's the best qualified to restore America's standing on the international stage.  And he could totally steal the news cycle from Trump's tiny hands by choosing Obama as his VP candidate. 

 

That's the first I'd heard anyone mention that. Wow. That would be wild. 

It's a wild and crazy thought, and should an event come to pass, it's a safe bet that Justice Kavanaugh will uphold 11% of the base.

Edited by Mister CIA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the posters I respect the most seem to be leaning towards one candidate.  While I do not agree with a lot of their opinions I do recognize that a change is going to have to happen.  I cannot in good conscience vote for Trump again.  So why not look into some of the candidates people you have respect for are interested in.  Thanks guys  and gals.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

Thanks Buddy. That's super interesting. I do wonder sometimes about the personal connection compared to the public perception. On that note, I have a friend who was able to spend some time with President Clinton in a small group setting. Said he went in diametrically opposed on just about every issue. My friend is one of the smartest and most personable and persuasive guys I know. And he said he was stunned by how personable and charming Clinton was. Like it was almost a "Mowgli don't look into Kaa's eyes" thing. Said it was seriously amazing. 

I’ve heard the same thing about Clinton. I have a friend who shook his hand (I forget exactly under what circumstances). My friend’s dad was a local Republican political operative here and my friend shared his dad’s political views — very conservative. But he said that Clinton had an almost magical charisma in person. Instead of being intimidating, he was just charming.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I’ve heard the same thing about Clinton. I have a friend who shook his hand (I forget exactly under what circumstances). My friend’s dad was a local Republican political operative here and my friend shared his dad’s political views — very conservative. But he said that Clinton had an almost magical charisma in person. Instead of being intimidating, he was just charming.

Exactly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rustycolts said:

Some of the posters I respect the most seem to be leaning towards one candidate.  While I do not agree with a lot of their opinions I do recognize that a change is going to have to happen.  I cannot in good conscience vote for Trump again.  So why not look into some of the candidates people you have respect for are interested in.  Thanks guys  and gals.

Are you leaning Klobuchar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mister CIA said:

Mitch Landrieu:  Personally, I prefer Klobuchar/Landrieu over Klobuchar/Beto.  Landrieu is the most likable politician, period.  I'd love to see him help pick off a red southern state, or two. 

After pulling down a statue of General Robert E. Lee that's going to be really close to impossible. I'd like to see him run though and give his thoughts on that topic an honest airing. It certainly would encircle the racists in the Southern GOP states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ffldrew said:

After pulling down a statue of General Robert E. Lee that's going to be really close to impossible. I'd like to see him run though and give his thoughts on that topic an honest airing. It certainly would encircle the racists in the Southern GOP states.

You're selling the South short. Dozens of racists die every day.

Edited by Mister CIA
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mister CIA said:

Are you leaning Klobuchar?

Yes I am going to look into her a little more.  I am not going to change voter registration though so I would not be able to support her in a primary.   I don't see any republicans running against Trump.  Libertarians can't get their act together.  So I am hoping the Dems can run someone I can get behind.  I know many of you hold Rand Paul in very low esteem but I could really get behind him as a 3rd party candidate,but that will never happen.  I do believe Trump has done some good things cutting some regulations trying to help us in trade,but he is just to me a vile human being and I cannot bring myself to vote for him again.  This thing with the wall is the most idiotic thing I have ever heard of it would never work a big waste of money.  Now maybe he is thinking of something like the Soviet Union did,I saw that one when I was in W.Berlin not a pretty sight and not a good look for the U.S.  So yes I am going to look into her I just wish there were more in the Scoop Jackson mold.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, rustycolts said:

Yes I am going to look into her a little more.  I am not going to change voter registration though so I would not be able to support her in a primary.   I don't see any republicans running against Trump.  Libertarians can't get their act together.  So I am hoping the Dems can run someone I can get behind.  I know many of you hold Rand Paul in very low esteem but I could really get behind him as a 3rd party candidate,but that will never happen.  I do believe Trump has done some good things cutting some regulations trying to help us in trade,but he is just to me a vile human being and I cannot bring myself to vote for him again.  This thing with the wall is the most idiotic thing I have ever heard of it would never work a big waste of money.  Now maybe he is thinking of something like the Soviet Union did,I saw that one when I was in W.Berlin not a pretty sight and not a good look for the U.S.  So yes I am going to look into her I just wish there were more in the Scoop Jackson mold.

Rand Paul is awful. In a heartless world, he's the most mindless.

ETA: He's wholly owned.

Edited by Mister CIA
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Thunderlips said:

I like Biden/Beto.  Flip the script on the "VP is the seasoned politician/POTUS is the Chosen One" trend that has happened for the past few cycles.  Let Beto be a "fighting VP" and let it be known that when Biden is done being POTUS (either after 4 or 😎 it's going to be Beto that replaces him.  

It's going to be next to impossible to put together a Democratic ticket without a woman on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mister CIA said:

Rand Paul is awful. In a heartless world, he's the most mindless.

Lol see what I mean.  That is ok though like I said I respect a lot of folks on this board that I don't necessarily agree with on some things.  The main thing for me is to get behind a candidate I can live with. Can mend the country and lead in a way that helps not hurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mister CIA said:

Klobuchar for me.  She's the perfect Trump antithesis, which checks the first box on my list - she's the most electable.  Her home-field advantage in Iowa should allow her to devote more attention to the early California primary (California is voting early in 2020 primary, right?).  There's no way she loses in Iowa, if she runs.

Now, pardon me while I whip out my bullets.

  • Beto: Probably my #2 on this list. While I think he's a little too green around the gills to run for POTUS in 2020, it's certainly possible he an leap frog the field (Obama says hi!).  Probably the best fund raiser out of all the possibilities, which I think makes him a shoe-in for VP candidate, if he does not get the nod.
  • Bloomberg: A reasonable choice.  I consider his NYC mayoral experience a big plus because it's critical that the next POTUS has the chops to step in on day 1 and start putting out Trumpster fires.  A youthful VP mate is probably best.
  • Biden: While I want to discount Mr. Joe, he's the best qualified to restore America's standing on the international stage.  And he could totally steal the news cycle from Trump's tiny hands by choosing Obama as his VP candidate. 
  • Harris:  Like her a lot, but I think her California Democrat demography hurts her, in a Nancy Pelosi kind of way.  She's my dream Attorney General though.
  • Warren: Nope, her best shot was 2016.  She's my dream Senate Majority Leader.
  • Bernie: Guy I'd most want to have a beer with, otherwise nope.
  • Booker: I like nearly everything about this guy, but I just don't see him emerging from the field. He probably gets framed as the most corporate of this entire bunch.  But man, his speeching is second only to Obama, and just barely.  Probably on several VP short lists.
  • Sherrod Brown:  Another who will crack top-5 of likely VP candidates.
  • Castro:  The "Vera" of politics.  Never see the guy, but here he is.
  • Gillibrand: Would be the most unauthentic contender. She's ranked #1 in a tier all to herself in my "hold your nose" rankings.  I'd support her nomination to Secretary of HUD.
  • Hickenlooper: Future Czar of Legalized Weed.
  • Holder:  Keeping it simple. Too polarizing.  Dream POTUS Chief of Staff.

Lots of 'B's!

 

Not Listed:

  • Tulsi:  Big fan (although I do need to filter the storyline about her and Syria; not sure what the facts are).  UN Ambassador.
  • HRCMy thought exactly.
  • Gillum:  Needs seasoning.
  • Stacey Abrams: Would love to see her replace Tom Perez.
  • Al Franken: My bold pick for Secretary of State.
  • Mitch Landrieu:  Personally, I prefer Klobuchar/Landrieu over Klobuchar/Beto.  Landrieu is the most likable politician, period.  I'd love to see him help pick off a red southern state, or two. 

ETA: James Webb:  Still my guy.  Would be the most over-qualified Secretary of Defense, ever.

I’m not buying Iowa going Kloubachar’s way. Evangelicals and farmers are still strongly behind Trump( Why I can’t comprehend) There’s nothing he can do to change that especially since he gave farmers the tariff assistance. Iowa has become a red state.

Edited by lazyike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, lazyike said:

I’m not buying Iowa going Kloubachar’s way. Evangelicals and farmers are still strongly behind Trump( Why I can’t comprehend) There’s nothing he can do to change that especially since he gave farmers the tariff assistance. Iowa has become a red state.

I think he means in the primary

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I’ve heard the same thing about Clinton. I have a friend who shook his hand (I forget exactly under what circumstances). My friend’s dad was a local Republican political operative here and my friend shared his dad’s political views — very conservative. But he said that Clinton had an almost magical charisma in person. Instead of being intimidating, he was just charming.

Like this

I've also heard the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

O'Rourke and Klobuchar seem, to me, to have the best combination of competence, character, genuineness, pragmatism, intelligence, and reasonableness.

Well put. Anyone who can get 50% in Texas can/should win many states with that message. Klobuchar is by no means flamboyant, but is likable and intelligent. You'd think this ticket would take female votes in a landslide.

I think Biden/Bernie/Holder would be the least likely to lure swing voters, who sadly are somehow probably going to matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Juxtatarot said:

Meaning less Biden support or more?  

Meaning I bet they'll be much less support here than in early polls.  He's getting a lot of support early, but I suspect it's simply because he's the most recognizable name. That's less of a factor when you're talking about people who post on a politics-oriented message board in the week after Xmas.

 

@Joe Bryant sorry, saw your post after writing this reply.  Answer above.

Edited by TobiasFunke
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The surprises for me in the results are:

1.  Klobuchar.  I knew she'd do well but I didn't think she'd win.

2. The lack of support to those candidates on the far left.  I thought Sanders would do much better and Warren currently has zero votes!  I'm not sure if this means the board is closer to the center left than I thought or if the majority is being pragmatic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

The surprises for me in the results are:

1.  Klobuchar.  I knew she'd do well but I didn't think she'd win.

2. The lack of support to those candidates on the far left.  I thought Sanders would do much better and Warren currently has zero votes!  I'm not sure if this means the board is closer to the center left than I thought or if the majority is being pragmatic.

 

I am near Warren/Sanders on most domestic policy, but I do think foreign policy and trade will probably be a much bigger focus after the disaster that is Trump.  

I think Warren is most useful in the Senate

Edited by Slapdash
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, timschochet said:
18 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This worries me. So many names and we could have a rubric where Dems end up with the GOP’s situation from 2016 allowing a populist to sneak through. 

 I think it's very likely, unfortunately.  Perhaps not a full blown populist, but there will very likely be strong populist elements to the winning campaign.  They will be hard to resist.

Just because I don’t know where else to put this ... some data re populist leaders:

https://twitter.com/yascha_mounk/status/1077997504573177858

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mister CIA said:

Klobuchar for me.  She's the perfect Trump antithesis, which checks the first box on my list - she's the most electable.  Her home-field advantage in Iowa should allow her to devote more attention to the early California primary (California is voting early in 2020 primary, right?).  There's no way she loses in Iowa, if she runs.

Now, pardon me while I whip out my bullets.

  • Beto: Probably my #2 on this list. While I think he's a little too green around the gills to run for POTUS in 2020, it's certainly possible he an leap frog the field (Obama says hi!).  Probably the best fund raiser out of all the possibilities, which I think makes him a shoe-in for VP candidate, if he does not get the nod.
  • Bloomberg: A reasonable choice.  I consider his NYC mayoral experience a big plus because it's critical that the next POTUS has the chops to step in on day 1 and start putting out Trumpster fires.  A youthful VP mate is probably best.
  • Biden: While I want to discount Mr. Joe, he's the best qualified to restore America's standing on the international stage.  And he could totally steal the news cycle from Trump's tiny hands by choosing Obama as his VP candidate. 
  • Harris:  Like her a lot, but I think her California Democrat demography hurts her, in a Nancy Pelosi kind of way.  She's my dream Attorney General though.
  • Warren: Nope, her best shot was 2016.  She's my dream Senate Majority Leader.
  • Bernie: Guy I'd most want to have a beer with, otherwise nope.
  • Booker: I like nearly everything about this guy, but I just don't see him emerging from the field. He probably gets framed as the most corporate of this entire bunch.  But man, his speeching is second only to Obama, and just barely.  Probably on several VP short lists.
  • Sherrod Brown:  Another who will crack top-5 of likely VP candidates.
  • Castro:  The "Vera" of politics.  Never see the guy, but here he is.
  • Gillibrand: Would be the most unauthentic contender. She's ranked #1 in a tier all to herself in my "hold your nose" rankings.  I'd support her nomination to Secretary of HUD.
  • Hickenlooper: Future Czar of Legalized Weed.
  • Holder:  Keeping it simple. Too polarizing.  Dream POTUS Chief of Staff.

Lots of 'B's!

 

Not Listed:

  • Tulsi:  Big fan (although I do need to filter the storyline about her and Syria; not sure what the facts are).  UN Ambassador.
  • HRCMy thought exactly.
  • Gillum:  Needs seasoning.
  • Stacey Abrams: Would love to see her replace Tom Perez.
  • Al Franken: My bold pick for Secretary of State.
  • Mitch Landrieu:  Personally, I prefer Klobuchar/Landrieu over Klobuchar/Beto.  Landrieu is the most likable politician, period.  I'd love to see him help pick off a red southern state, or two. 

ETA: James Webb:  Still my guy.  Would be the most over-qualified Secretary of Defense, ever.

Pretty good breakdown here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Just because I don’t know where else to put this ... some data re populist leaders:

https://twitter.com/yascha_mounk/status/1077997504573177858

Only because I don't know the answer - how much correlation is there to "populist" and "Authoritative" leaders?

Just a quick glance at the results in that data suggests there is a high correlation - and that might make it difficult to discern what is causing the damage to democracy.  Of course, it could be as simple as power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TobiasFunke said:

Meaning I bet they'll be much less support here than in early polls.  He's getting a lot of support early, but I suspect it's simply because he's the most recognizable name. That's less of a factor when you're talking about people who post on a politics-oriented message board in the week after Xmas.

 

@Joe Bryant sorry, saw your post after writing this reply.  Answer above.

Yes this is likely now.  Right now how many nationally know Beto or Klobuchar types ?  People that follow politics, sure.  But others who only follow local news won’t know as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, lazyike said:
9 hours ago, joffer said:

I think he means in the primary

Ok my bad

Yes, the primary. But even so - Obama carried Iowa easily over Romney in 2012 (52 - 46) and over McCain in 2008 (54 - 44).

And going back further - Kerry lost to Bush by 1/2 point, Gore beat Bush by 1/2 point, and Clinton domonated both times he was up.

So maybe it was just an Iowa hates Hilary Clinton thing

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Juxtatarot said:

The surprises for me in the results are:

1.  Klobuchar.  I knew she'd do well but I didn't think she'd win.

2. The lack of support to those candidates on the far left.  I thought Sanders would do much better and Warren currently has zero votes!  I'm not sure if this means the board is closer to the center left than I thought or if the majority is being pragmatic.

 

I think while progressive issues are building...a progressive candidate won’t necessarily beat Trump. He will energize the base by saying socialist and communist over and over and over.  And little else will matter. 

I think small steps can work a bit better of the progressives will show up to vote for something more center.  Because not sure the center-right that don’t may not like trump will vote for a progressive 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current mayor of South Bend, Pete Buttigieg (Boot - a - judge) will probably be making an announcement any day that he is running.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Buttigieg

Short version...
- 36 year old
- Harvard Grad
- Veteran of 7 month tour in Afghanistan in 2013,  remains a lieutenant in the Naval Reserve.
- Openly Gay

Edit to add - Currently 200-1 at Landbrokes. 

Edited by elkurzhal
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not too sure about the Beto as VP. Generally a VP is chosen as someone who shores up perceived weaknesses as a candidate. 

Beto is inspirational but not sure he has the forgeign policy or legislative chops to be seen as someone who shores up a ticket. 

I'd vote Beto over generic Republican in a minute but seems like a cycle or two early for him.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Booker: I like nearly everything about this guy, but I just don't see him emerging from the field. He probably gets framed as the most corporate of this entire bunch.  But man, his speeching is second only to Obama, and just barely.  Probably on several VP short lists.

Booker can emerge from the field - he's done his homework and has been working hard here in the South in all of these elections - Stacy Abrams, Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin, Doug Jones and many others across the region - he is ready to pick up a lot of votes on super Tuesday. He'll just have to stay close in Iowa and New Hampshire and then he'll pick up steam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ffldrew said:

Booker can emerge from the field - he's done his homework and has been working hard here in the South in all of these elections - Stacy Abrams, Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin, Doug Jones and many others across the region - he is ready to pick up a lot of votes on super Tuesday. He'll just have to stay close in Iowa and New Hampshire and then he'll pick up steam.

Don't know if it's too soon but Obama wasn't in the Senate very long so who knows. I think he'd be a terrific candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jackstraw said:

I'm not too sure about the Beto as VP. Generally a VP is chosen as someone who shores up perceived weaknesses as a candidate. 

Beto is inspirational but not sure he has the forgeign policy or legislative chops to be seen as someone who shores up a ticket. 

I'd vote Beto over generic Republican in a minute but seems like a cycle or two early for him.  

If the candidate is Biden he doesn't need someone to shore up his foreign policy or legislative chops. He needs someone to shore up his support among younger people, people demanding new voices in Democratic leadership, and people who want the party to start reaching out to southern states that could become swing states. Beto fits the bill, although I'd argue a woman (maybe Stacey Abrams?) fits the bill even better.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BobbyLayne said:

Don't know if it's too soon but Obama wasn't in the Senate very long so who knows. I think he'd be a terrific candidate.

That was the turning point - and the biggest point of contention with Hillary in 2008 - she had set herself up in the many months prior to the primaries in the South courting votes/favors - then along comes an African American Senator to upset the apple cart in South Carolina. Changed the dynamics of the media story and turned it into a race. Obama then took off on Super Tuesday in the South and in essence tied the race at that point.

Hillary finally got her wins in 2016 by default but had Bernie been able to get his work going sooner in the South I think he would have picked up enough to stop Hillary with the later momentum he gathered. It was just too hard to fight his fights on 3 fronts - Iowa, NH and the South. He was still unknown in the south once Super Tuesday hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

If the candidate is Biden he doesn't need someone to shore up his foreign policy or legislative chops. He needs someone to shore up his support among younger people, people demanding new voices in Democratic leadership, and people who want the party to start reaching out to southern states that could become swing states. Beto fits the bill, although I'd argue a woman (maybe Stacey Abrams?) fits the bill even better.

I seriously doubt that younger people would flock to the polls because Beto in on the ticket as Biden's VP.

My perception is that VP picks don't move the needle much. I can't remember an election where the VP choice made much of a difference either way. Sarah Palin was a pretty awful pick and may have cost McCain a few votes, but ultimately I don't think it was the difference between winning or losing to Obama.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

I seriously doubt that younger people would flock to the polls because Beto in on the ticket as Biden's VP.

My perception is that VP picks don't move the needle much. I can't remember an election where the VP choice made much of a difference either way. Sarah Palin was a pretty awful pick and may have cost McCain a few votes, but ultimately I don't think it was the difference between winning or losing to Obama.

I mostly agree, but in this case they'll probably be using the VP pick to assuage whatever branch of the anti-Trump, pro-American Exceptionalism movement feels slighted by the nominee. There's a lot of people under that umbrella, and the pick is bound to upset some of them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ffldrew said:

had Bernie been able to get his work going sooner in the South 

There was no work Bernie could have done in the South. 

IMO, the southern primaries for the Democratic Party are the least democratic aspect of our Presidential politics, period. There are 3 reasons for this: the first is that most of them are caucuses. The second is that, over the past 40 years, southern whites have largely abandoned the Democratic Party, making it dominated by African-Americans. The 3rd reason is that African-American voting in the South is led by churches more than it is anywhere else in the nation: the ministers endorse a candidate and that is who gets voted for. 

So what you have in these states is a very small group of people deciding who the winner is going to be. In 2008, that was Barack Obama. In 2016, that was Hillary Clinton. It’s not the single deciding factor for the entire Democratic Party, but it is extremely significant and usually decisive. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, lazyike said:

I’m not buying Iowa going Kloubachar’s way. Evangelicals and farmers are still strongly behind Trump( Why I can’t comprehend) There’s nothing he can do to change that especially since he gave farmers the tariff assistance. Iowa has become a red state.

Recent poll by Des Moines Register of primary dem voters/support shows 32 percent support Biden and 3 percent support Kloubachar.  The poll claims Iowa voters want experience.  To lazy to post a link, but feel free to google it.  I use to live in MN, and don’t understand the love for Kloubachar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Gopher State said:

 I use to live in MN, and don’t understand the love for Kloubachar.

She has bipartisan appeal and has won her senate seats going away. Even people who voted for her opponent have nice things to say about her. You are in a huge minority here

Link to comment
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.
×
  • Create New...