The GoP?

[hobbsyoyo]

That's the mistake that Hillary made. If Warren (or Bernie) wins, they should to pick someone inspirational not someone "safe" to draw in moderates. In fact, since Bootyjudge is gay, he would arguably be even weaker in this regard because he's too moderate to inspire the liberal voters and too gay to inspire the moderates.

Also @Lexicus , I know you disagree, but I get the feeling that Warren is more likely to be a flaming liberal who is pretending to be moderate to increase her perceived "electability", who will go hard left once in office, than a seekwet moderate in liberal's clothing.

The one thing in Buttigeig's favor is that he speaks the language of the religious voter pretty fluently and more importantly, doesn't shy away from deploying it. Unfortunately, I don't think that will matter as the religious voter has hitched themselves to the devil but it may play well with the moderate voters. Probably not, though.

 

[Lexicus]

So the Democrats literally need someone who motivates Obama level turnout to win... and I just don't see that with any of the current candidates.

I think Bernie could be this candidate, or just possibly Warren, but I mostly agree with you and I still think that if nothing significant changes before the election Trump will win.

too gay to inspire the moderates.

Just quoting this phrase for posterity

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Why is everyone so down on the field of contenders this far out? They haven't begun voting yet...

I will say that it's extremely frustrating that they're continuing to allow so many candidates at the debates at this point but other than that, I don't see any reason to doubt that there will be enthusiastic support for the eventual nominee. Or is the problem that Biden is leading the polls?

 

[Lexicus]

Why is everyone so down on the field of contenders this far out? They haven't begun voting yet...

Just a feeling, I guess.

I don't see any reason to doubt that there will be enthusiastic support for the eventual nominee.

I would guess @Sommerswerd would reply that there is a difference between "enthusiastic support" and "Obama-level support"

 

[Sommerswerd]

It's rough to have to compare candidates in the light of Obama's campaigns.

True... but the fact remains that he's the only Democrat who won recently, and he needed about 66 million votes to do it. So it may be an unfair comparison, but its one that has to be made regardless.

Why is everyone so down on the field of contenders this far out?

See above... literally cause they're not Obama... seriously... that's the reason when you really boil it down.

I would guess @Sommerswerd would reply that there is a difference between "enthusiastic support" and "Obama-level support"

Correct.

Bernie's support is deep but its not wide. Biden's support is wide but its not deep. We need support that is both.

 

[Lexicus]

Bernie's support is deep but its not wide.

The counterpoint to that is:

 

[Sommerswerd]

We need twentysomethings-willing-to-stand-in-freezing-rain-for-hours-to-vote level of enthusiasm... We need people wearing tee-shirts-with-the-candidates-face-on-it level of enthusiasm. We need... dare I say people by the millions wearing baseball caps with the candidate's slogan/logo on it... because they want to be part of "the movement" and its "cool" to do so... We're just not there.

 

[Lexicus]

We need twentysomethings-willing-to-stand-in-freezing-rain-for-hours-to-vote level of enthusiasm... We need people wearing tee-shirts-with-the-candidates-face-on-it level of enthusiasm. We need... dare I say people by the millions wearing baseball caps with the candidate's slogan/logo on it... because they want to be part of "the movement" and its "cool" to do so... We're just not there.

Yeah I mean I don't disagree. I'm just saying Sanders looks to me like the only way we can possibly get there, as of now. He is the one with a network of enthusiastic activists willing to knock on doors all across the country.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Yeah I mean I don't disagree. I'm just saying Sanders looks to me like the only way we can possibly get there, as of now. He is the one with a network of enthusiastic activists willing to knock on doors all across the country.

The primary is the place to put that to the test, no?

@Lexicus - What is that graph and where can I take a look at it? I notice Warren and Harris aren't even on there... and Gabbard doesn't get Hawaii?

 

[Lexicus]

@Lexicus - What is that graph and where can I take a look at it? I notice Warren and Harris aren't even on there... and Gabbard doesn't get Hawaii?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/02/us/politics/2020-democratic-fundraising.html

It is behind a paywall but opening in an incognito window (chrome) worked for me.

 

[Sommerswerd]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/08/02/us/politics/2020-democratic-fundraising.html

It is behind a paywall but opening in an incognito window (chrome) worked for me.

Thanks. So its fundraising. This graph makes it even more puzzling that Biden is so far ahead in the polls.

 

[Lexicus]

Thanks. So its fundraising. This graph makes it even more puzzling that Biden is so far ahead in the polls.

Bernie is so far ahead in terms of the number of individual donors that they had to make a map excluding him to show information about some of the other candidates. To me, again, this suggests Bernie is the guy who CAN build the level of enthusiasm you're talking about...no guarantees and we're not there yet, but we could be.

I'm not sure if anyone else can do that.

 

[Farm Boy]

We need twentysomethings-willing-to-stand-in-freezing-rain-for-hours-to-vote level of enthusiasm... We need people wearing tee-shirts-with-the-candidates-face-on-it level of enthusiasm. We need... dare I say people by the millions wearing baseball caps with the candidate's slogan/logo on it... because they want to be part of "the movement" and its "cool" to do so... We're just not there.

Then why aren't you all talking about who is competent-ish enough, tone-ish right enough, and then, well, likeable? Like Ike. Or the Gip. Or Obama. Or yes, that presidential D-F that D-F's seem to like specifically because they're D-Fs. Maybe you are, I noticed you pop up in a GoP thread, didn't read the beginning, and everyone's talking about the Democratic primaries again. Obama was his-tory. If I had to guess, the Democrats are stuck for good or for ill trying, intentionally, to make herstory on just about every election from here on out until it happens. The who > what is strong enough for that, no new news but for the players of the game. Who is the one that's energetic and likeable enough to forgive when they screw up? Because they all have, will, or will be lied about having. Need somebody that AgeOfassClown lite can harrumph for and try and get the young'n'dumb riled, right?

 

[sophie]

Why is everyone so down on the field of contenders this far out? They haven't begun voting yet...

I will say that it's extremely frustrating that they're continuing to allow so many candidates at the debates at this point but other than that, I don't see any reason to doubt that there will be enthusiastic support for the eventual nominee. Or is the problem that Biden is leading the polls?

Because Trump won by capturing a triangle of support along the Mississippi-Ohio rivers that formed a critical bulwark of the Democrats' traditional Coastal/Urban Whites-Minorities-Unionists coalition. The compelling narrative to my mind is that, much like with Brexit, the urban intellectual elite wing of the party told the unionist wing to vote for their neoliberalism "or else" and the unionist wing looked at the havoc that neoliberalism has wreaked on their communities and said "no, fudge you."

This is where Trump's unflappable 40% base of support comes from. This is why that base never wavers no matter what buffoonery Trump commits or obviously infeasible policy he pursues. Because it doesn't matter. It freaks the coastal elites out; all the more reason to laugh and back the man, and any effort to unseat him or embroil him in scandal serves only to emphasize the elitism of the, well, urban elite, and confirm in their mind that that elite contingent holds them in utter contempt and merely expects them to provide the votes with no guarantee of reciprocity.

The reason I don't think any non-Warren/Sanders choice (and even with Warren it's still only like a 35/40% chance at best) is because none of the rest offer anything that is substantially different than what Hillary represented. Same old crappy Neoliberal promises. Same old emphasis on expertise and qualifications over populist rhetoric and speaking to voters' material condition, same old deference to respectability and identity politics. If a Klobuchar or Harris or Buttigieg wins the primary we're going to get the same as last time: the dem candidate is going to lean on Trump's boneheaded policies and distasteful comportment and rhetoric, Trump is going to smugly smirk and land an extremely biting and, frankly, rather accurate insult, the Dem will gasp and "how dare you sir," and that triangle will redeploy the middle finger come November.

Bernie and Warren are the only ones who are actually ignoring Trump, speaking to voters' material condition and running on plans that actually address that condition. They're the only ones providing a genuine alternative which nullifies Trump's strength. I rate Warren's chances as low because, while her message is good, she's still very professorial elite in her behavior and tone (her attempts to come across as an Oklahoma everyman you can have a beer with remind me very much of that episode of Parks and Rec where Leslie tried to win over that focus group voter by bowling with him), and she has a ton of skeletons in her closet (Pocahontas is the obvious one, but her relationship with big money, her associations with Hillary, this recent dust-up about her outright lying about being a teacher, and possibly also lying about being fired for being pregnant) which play directly into that distinction.

 

[Lexicus]

On a side note I was just out on a weekend trip to the Shenandoah Valley, we're talking real rural Virginia (perhaps ironically, I saw fewer Confederate battle flags on display there than I have in rural areas of states like Pennsylvania and New Hampshire). And those places are just dying. Almost everyone's old, everything's run down. You can tell why the people there have had it with mainstream politicians. Trump isn't going to do diddly-squat to help them but he is at least speaking in a way that implicitly acknowledges their pain is there - contrast with "America Is Already Great"

 

[Farm Boy]

holds them in utter contempt

Hehehe. Well, yeah. That's an accurate read.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Then why aren't you all talking about who is competent-ish enough, tone-ish right enough, and then, well, likeable? Like Ike. Or the Gip. Or Obama. Or yes, that presidential D-F that D-F's seem to like specifically because they're D-Fs. Maybe you are, I noticed you pop up in a GoP thread, didn't read the beginning, and everyone's talking about the Democratic primaries again. Obama was his-tory. If I had to guess, the Democrats are stuck for good or for ill trying, intentionally, to make herstory on just about every election from here on out until it happens. The who > what is strong enough for that, no new news but for the players of the game. Who is the one that's energetic and likeable enough to forgive when they screw up? Because they all have, will, or will be lied about having. Need somebody that AgeOfassClown lite can harrumph for and try and get the young'n'dumb riled, right?

Its not about them being dumb, its about them having better/more interesting things to do with their precious youth than argue about politics on the internet. Like get laid, enjoy friends, read new and interesting books... have fun and enjoy life. That special perspective actually gives the young a much lower tolerance than us oldies for bullsqueeze. They know you're mostly full of it, so either you're at least entertaining and inspiring or I'm changing the channel.

People don't watch wraslin' cause they're dumb, they watch it because it's damn entertaining. It brings joy and happiness and excitement to life. Sometimes some people are lucky. They have enough happiness from what going on in their days to not need/want any additional inputs... but most people aren't that fortunate. Some of us need a drink, a distraction, entertainment. It doesn't make us dumb, just people. I don't see anything wrong with people wanting their elected leaders to bring some joy and inspiration to their lives.

Anyway, I popped up cause I got the little notification thing when someone tags/mentions you by name. I notice you didn't ignore your little taggy thing... what you get to wave hello when poked but I don't? I didn't read the thread title. You think I'm off topic? Report me. Or sue me.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, ok. "Young'n'dumb" was supposed to stand in for "young'dumb'n'full of ***," which is, more than anything as you say a statement about priorities rather than intellectual capacity. So who's likeable and right enough? Who casts the best mental image of you supporting them when they're shipping home body bags from some stupid morally-grey engagement that didn't do what it was supposed to do anyways? Who casts the best mental image of you supporting them when it comes out that they are a thief, liar, and currently engaged in cheating at least as bad as that turd that leads the Patriots that everyone has decided doesn't actually actually need to follow the rules?

What's up with the taggy thing that I didn't do right? It's good to see you*!

*The point of the statement you noticed, I think, was rather that the thread became interesting enough to click on when I noticed the last poster, but not interesting enough to read the start of it.

 

[Sommerswerd]

You forgot the "y" in your emoji old man

And the answer to your question is "None of them"... That's the problem... and how this relates to the thread title, I guess is that their loss is the GOPs gain... or something along those lines.

 

[Farm Boy]

Fix'd!

Edit: Bah, that really sucks. Assclown should go. Bernie at least seems to have some energy out here, he doesn't seem particularly gun-grabby. How old is he again? Maybe that token VP pick is more toothsome than usual.