2020 US Election (Part One)

[Zkribbler]

I'm descended from Cherokees. My father's sister was close enough that she got oil royalty checks.
When my parents died, I found papers indicating I'm also part Lakota.
My mother's father is supposedly a Hapsburg, but I don't believe it.
I also heard rumors my father's related to Buffalo Bill and Kit Carson. I don't believe that either.
My claim to fame is being a descendant of Parson Weems, the guy who made up the story about George Washington cutting down the cherry tree.

 

[mitsho]

I find it interesting that Warren anounces she is going to run and people in here just go straight to debating looks („Native American Ancestry“, „why/how Trump dodged the Vietnam War“) instead of content (which she explores in the video: the middle class losing ground + people of colour hurting more relatively). I mean, come on? What is more interesting?

 

[EnglishEdward]

I think that it is always very foolish for politicians to make claims about distant ancestry.

First of all a lot of what people are told by their family is simply not true, often a forgotten cover
up of children borne out of wedlock or from adulterous by affairs, rapes, or of charitable adoptions.

Secondly; the identification of ancient people into groups is very approximate, distribution of DNA variants
of past populations is statistical not exact, and mechanism of genetic recombination can be haphazard.

Thirdly aspiring politicians should be judged on who they are, their character and skills and their
track record, not on that of their supposed long dead precursors.

 

[Ironsided]

Warren is cool. She has the background and experience that makes me trust her to do a good enough job (mainly of cleaning up after Trump). If she goes all the way and is given a second term maybe she could do more? She has the right ideas of treating the disease rather than the symptoms, I mean restoring democracy and regulating rampant egoism. Age may be a future issue but not atm. The best part is I think she is a perfect compromise and middle ground for Hilleryites and Bernie bro democrats, isn’t she?

 

[AdrienIer]

Left wing enough to appeal to the base and Bernie supporters, yet respected enough by the establishment. But I'm afraid that the smear campaign has already done its job, and she won't make it to super tuesday.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Here's a reminder that no matter how Trump ends up, we will be dealing with his racist and homophobic appointees to the judiciary for decades to come:
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/02/6812...ments-were-confirmed-at-historic-pace-in-2018

 

[Estebonrober]

I find it interesting that Warren anounces she is going to run and people in here just go straight to debating looks („Native American Ancestry“, „why/how Trump dodged the Vietnam War“) instead of content (which she explores in the video: the middle class losing ground + people of colour hurting more relatively). I mean, come on? What is more interesting?

Yea politico just did a piece on her likability which is classic sexist crap when it comes to women in politics. It felt like a hit piece. I might even campaign for her, I've said for a long time the economic winds need to swing back to the little guy, she I think best and most realistically represents how to get there.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I am not sure if she can get the nomination but she is a top contender in my book and is progressive enough to make me happily vote for her. One of her proteges (a former student of hers that became a professor herself) just won my district in Irvine/Orange County for the House and I hope Warren inspires more progressives to run.

 

[onejayhawk]

No one cares, I like Warren a lot but replying to this was almost as stupid as every time Trump tweets. It was pointless and only hurt herself.

This is simply wrong. I get your point, but people do care. More to the point, she did not handle the issue well over the last several months. People care a great deal about that and it will remain an issue that will cause a distraction.

J

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

I think Warren would have been a really strong candidate in 2016 but her under-performance in 2018 and her declining popularity means she's probably not a great candidate for 2020. I'm not sure the national spotlight is her best position.

 

[Estebonrober]

I think Warren would have been a really strong candidate in 2016 but her under-performance in 2018 and her declining popularity means she's probably not a great candidate for 2020. I'm not sure the national spotlight is her best position.

Under-performance in 2018?

 

[metalhead]

I think Warren would have been a really strong candidate in 2016 but her under-performance in 2018 and her declining popularity means she's probably not a great candidate for 2020. I'm not sure the national spotlight is her best position.

Under-performance in 2018?

Given her state's partisan lean and the national electoral climate, Warren won by about 15 points less than she ought to have.

I have since read on the Twitter machine that this could likely be due to the fact that she spent a lot of her campaign money on getting other Democrats elected, as opposed to pumping up her own numbers in a race she was guaranteed to win.

I don't know what to think. She seems closest by far to having her finger on what really is ailing America, but she also has very low favorability and doesn't really have the personal bio of someone you'd want to see running against Trump. She is very much an academic, and seems to struggle to really connect with people.

 

[Kyriakos]

If only the dems had someone like bernie, amirite

 

[Sommerswerd]

I think Warren would have been a really strong candidate in 2016 but her under-performance in 2018 and her declining popularity means she's probably not a great candidate for 2020. I'm not sure the national spotlight is her best position.

I agree and have said as much previously. Also, Warren has lost a lot of the shiny/newness luster that she had in 2016.

Given her state's partisan lean and the national electoral climate, Warren won by about 15 points less than she ought to have.

I have since read on the Twitter machine that this could likely be due to the fact that she spent a lot of her campaign money on getting other Democrats elected, as opposed to pumping up her own numbers in a race she was guaranteed to win.

I don't know what to think. She seems closest by far to having her finger on what really is ailing America, but she also has very low favorability and doesn't really have the personal bio of someone you'd want to see running against Trump. She is very much an academic, and seems to struggle to really connect with people.

My trepidation about Warren is that in contrast to the mighty Hillary-slayer that she might have been in 2016, she now really risks coming off as Hillary 2.0, the ReHillarying... unless... UNLESS... and I know folks are probably tired of hearing me say this, but... she beats Hillary in a primary.

I think of all the potential Democratic candidates, Warren, more than any other needs Hillary to run, in order to establish a stark contrast between her and Hillary. Otherwise she easily gets branded as literally a Bernie in Hillary clothing... or a Hillary in Bernie clothing with a Hillary suit on top of it... pick your metaphor... the point is Warren worries me this cycle, in a way that she didn't last cycle.

More to the point... how do the Democrats win? Its gotta be to either a) attract conservatives/moderates that went for Trump or stayed home, voted third party etc., or b) drive up liberal enthusiasm, particularly among young voters, specifically in MI, PA, OH, and WI, right? So does Warren outdo, say Bernie in category b? Cause you don't have folks like @Farm Boy , @Commodore , @Berzerker , (or even @Kyriakos who, strictly speaking, can't vote in our election) sounding off with enthusiasm for Warren the way they did/do for Bernie. So I think category a is definitely doomed with Warren.

Warren is seeming like another Kerry in the making, results-wise.

 

[Gori the Grey]

No Dem should bother trying to get the likes of Commodore, Berzerker or Kyriakos (!), and I have little doubt that Farm Boy already votes Dem.

As to your bigger question, I think beating Trump will largely take care of itself. A good number of people voted for what they were fantasizing/hoping for in him. Now they've seen what he is. And he now has to run on what he is as a president, not on what you hope he might prove to be. And he's lousy as a president.

 

[Kyriakos]

Nice snipe, but i actually voted once for the "coalition of radical left", so if i am conservative it would make you far-right, @Sommerswerd

 

[Sommerswerd]

Nice snipe, but i actually voted once for the "coalition of radical left", so if i am conservative it would nake you far-right, @Sommerswerd

It's not a "snipe". You've mentioned that (CotRL) several times before... I haven't forgotten. But where you stand on Grecian politics is irrelevant Kyr. This isn't the Greek election we're talking about, its the Murican one. And on US politics/political ideology, your positions, leanings etc speak for themselves... to wit... you 1) really like Bernie a lot, 2) hate and despise Hillary; and 3) have no clue who Elizabeth Warren is or what she is about.

I don't think you'd seriously dispute either of those 3 points... not to mention the fact that you're already projecting your feelings about Hillary (ie she's a warmonger) onto Warren... so based on that, I am not liking Warren's chances, in terms of attracting folks like you. That is my point.

 

[Kyriakos]

Well, i would not vote for w or trump either. I would have voted obama. Maybe hillary sucks?
Btw, no, syriza: corl. And after 2016 skorl.

 

[Traitorfish]

No one here cares enough, or has ever cared enough, about that stuff to be particularly accurate about it...unless of course you are a right wing dingbat president with no moral compass and a penchant for lying faster than most people can talk who just wants to throw attention elsewhere.

In fairness to Trump- and, jeez, isn't that a phrase- he can point to the precise Olde Worlde peasant villages his ancestors emigrated from, so he's relatively free of the sort of genealogical uncertainty you describe. It's really the one time he's set a standard for his opponents that he hasn't immediately violated, however weird and insidious a standard it might be.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Oh, yeah, back to the genetic test. I guess I'm in the minority in thinking she handled that in a politically astute fashion. 1) The test confirmed what her family's oral history had told her: that she had a Native American ancestor six to ten generations back. 2) She dropped it at a politically-uncharged moment, not right when Trump is dogging her about it--so it doesn't look like her knuckling under to his pressure on the matter. And now she can 3) treat it as a settled matter, "Why are you still harping on that thing that I proved months ago? Anyway, my plan for holding predatory lenders to account is . . . "