• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brainster said:
Howard Schultz has stepped down as CEO of Starbucks and is getting some buzz, which New York Magazine tries to kill:



He sounds like this cycle's Martin O'Malley; someone who could have crossover appeal to moderate Republicans and who is going to get nowhere because that is not what Democratic primary voters are looking for.
Click to expand...

Schultz is despised in Sports fans in his home State as he sold the Sonics to the Oklahoma owners who he and everyone else knew would move the team.
 
Governors and former governors are where it's at for the Dems. They have the governing thing down. They aren't part of a "Washington Establishment". A swing state governor can run on their ability to work across party lines. Roy Cooper in North Carolina and John Hickenlooper in Colorado could be good choices.

Hickenlooper is a self made man. He built two of his own businesses but without the silver spoon Trump had. He has cross over appeal being a swing state governor. He has a close working relationship with John Kasich, proving he can be bipartisan.
 
Craig4 said:
Governors and former governors are where it's at for the Dems. They have the governing thing down. They aren't part of a "Washington Establishment". A swing state governor can run on their ability to work across party lines. Roy Cooper in North Carolina and John Hickenlooper in Colorado could be good choices.

Hickenlooper is a self made man. He built two of his own businesses but without the silver spoon Trump had. He has cross over appeal being a swing state governor. He has a close working relationship with John Kasich, proving he can be bipartisan.
Click to expand...

This has always been a winning dishonest strategy for the left. They always ave to lie about who they are. I mean, who wants to be labeled a leftist?
 
Craig4 said:
Hickenlooper is a self made man. He built two of his own businesses but without the silver spoon Trump had. He has cross over appeal being a swing state governor. He has a close working relationship with John Kasich, proving he can be bipartisan.
Click to expand...

Yeah, good luck selling bipartisanship to this year's (or 2020's) electorate.
 
Brainster said:
Yeah, good luck selling bipartisanship to this year's (or 2020's) electorate.
Click to expand...

There's a huge crossover potential. The people who call themselves "Independendents", now. The GOP has that 80% Trump-support figure, but with only 26% of the country self-identifying as Republican, they can keep that 80% and ride it to a resounding defeat. Trump playing to his base will achieve that. He gets what he wants; fan mail and huzzahs at his rallies. But 80% of 26% of the electorate is 21% of the popular vote. He's gotta find a whole lot more than that - and it's in the so-called "Independents".

After another year-and-a-half of trench warfare, a whole lot of people are going to be war-weary and someone proposing to get things done may just appeal to them.
 
Craig4 said:
Governors and former governors are where it's at for the Dems. They have the governing thing down. They aren't part of a "Washington Establishment". A swing state governor can run on their ability to work across party lines. Roy Cooper in North Carolina and John Hickenlooper in Colorado could be good choices.

Hickenlooper is a self made man. He built two of his own businesses but without the silver spoon Trump had. He has cross over appeal being a swing state governor. He has a close working relationship with John Kasich, proving he can be bipartisan.
Click to expand...

logger said:
This has always been a winning dishonest strategy for the left. They always ave to lie about who they are. I mean, who wants to be labeled a leftist?
Click to expand...

What is dishonest except your comment?

Also Bernie Sanders is a leftist and even calls himself a socialist and whole lot of people supported him.
 
Foolmewunz said:
There's a huge crossover potential. The people who call themselves "Independendents", now. The GOP has that 80% Trump-support figure, but with only 26% of the country self-identifying as Republican, they can keep that 80% and ride it to a resounding defeat. Trump playing to his base will achieve that. He gets what he wants; fan mail and huzzahs at his rallies. But 80% of 26% of the electorate is 21% of the popular vote. He's gotta find a whole lot more than that - and it's in the so-called "Independents".

After another year-and-a-half of trench warfare, a whole lot of people are going to be war-weary and someone proposing to get things done may just appeal to them.
Click to expand...

You're talking sensibly, but the people who vote in the Democratic primaries are not going to be sensible (and for that matter, I think the people who voted in the Republican primaries in 2016 were also insensible).

First of all, Hillary, the electable one, lost. Bernie, the guy with all the enthusiasm behind him, did not. Yes, he lost the battle for the nomination, but let's face it the party machinery did have its hand on the scales, and Bernie did not campaign hard against Hillary early on, probably because he did not feel he had a chance until he started winning.

And anyway, who is the safe, dependable candidate this time around? Joe Biden? I guess he's young compared to Bernie. John Kerry? I'm just not seeing anybody suited for that particular role, which may be why both Biden and Kerry have made noises about running, but I can't really see them keeping the establishment Democrats together the way Hillary could.

So it's wide open, and I have a hunch that the Democrats are really not tired of losing enough. And what I mean by that is that they can sell themselves on the idea that they should have won 2000 and 2016, and if they'd won 2000 they would have won 2004 as well, which means they'd have a winning streak of 7 consecutive presidential elections.

And in fairness, the GOP got pretty lucky in 2000 and 2016; I don't deny that those elections could have gone either way easily. But of course if Al Gore is President in 2007 when the economic meltdown starts John McCain or Mitt Romney probably waltzes to victory in 2008.

So I think the "trim the sails and get a win" strategy is going to be hooted at among the Democratic primary voters in 2020. They'll fall in love with somebody (Warren, Harris or more likely some handsome male politician). But he's going to have to be very solidly liberal and get the support of the netkooks, err, netroots.
 
Brainster said:
You're talking sensibly, but the people who vote in the Democratic primaries are not going to be sensible (and for that matter, I think the people who voted in the Republican primaries in 2016 were also insensible).

First of all, Hillary, the electable one, lost. Bernie, the guy with all the enthusiasm behind him, did not. Yes, he lost the battle for the nomination, but let's face it the party machinery did have its hand on the scales, and Bernie did not campaign hard against Hillary early on, probably because he did not feel he had a chance until he started winning.

And anyway, who is the safe, dependable candidate this time around? Joe Biden? I guess he's young compared to Bernie. John Kerry? I'm just not seeing anybody suited for that particular role, which may be why both Biden and Kerry have made noises about running, but I can't really see them keeping the establishment Democrats together the way Hillary could.

So it's wide open, and I have a hunch that the Democrats are really not tired of losing enough. And what I mean by that is that they can sell themselves on the idea that they should have won 2000 and 2016, and if they'd won 2000 they would have won 2004 as well, which means they'd have a winning streak of 7 consecutive presidential elections.

And in fairness, the GOP got pretty lucky in 2000 and 2016; I don't deny that those elections could have gone either way easily. But of course if Al Gore is President in 2007 when the economic meltdown starts John McCain or Mitt Romney probably waltzes to victory in 2008.

So I think the "trim the sails and get a win" strategy is going to be hooted at among the Democratic primary voters in 2020. They'll fall in love with somebody (Warren, Harris or more likely some handsome male politician). But he's going to have to be very solidly liberal and get the support of the netkooks, err, netroots.
Click to expand...

Good analysis, although with Gore in office the meltdown may not have occurred until later, due to lack of the drag of the Iraq war and post 9/11 effects. Could have been earlier also, though in my opinion the presidential effects on the economy are generally over-rated.
 
Last edited:
The GOP House candidate for one of the more flappable districts in Southeren New Jersey might have just shot himself in the foot with a "Diversity is Crap" remark,and more or less telling voters the women and minorities need to shut up and stop their whining.
Just about the most blatent appeal to the Angry White Male I have seen..and in a purple district. Not a good look.
 
logger said:
This has always been a winning dishonest strategy for the left. They always ave to lie about who they are. I mean, who wants to be labeled a leftist?
Click to expand...


What are they, really, then?
 
With his current strong polling in the Ohio senate race, Sherrod Brown must be thinking about 2020.
At first sight, he seems to tick a fair number of boxes.
 
Firestone said:
With his current strong polling in the Ohio senate race, Sherrod Brown must be thinking about 2020.
At first sight, he seems to tick a fair number of boxes.
Click to expand...

Could be more handsome (he's more a John Kerry or an Al Gore than a Bill Clinton or Barack Obama), but aside from that I agree, he should definitely be considered a strong potential candidate. He has excellent connections with the netroots, and I suspect he's got the fire in the belly.
 
Sure. Taking the high ground got us a dirty Russian whore as president.

What might be better would be if Avenatti ran a 527 organization aimed at defeating Trump so the candidate could go high and the 527 could go low.
 
Last edited:
Gonna go way out on a limb here:

K. Harris & J. Kennedy III for the Dems in 2020.

Harris talks tough. I mean she has a Trump-esque style of "I don't take no bulls...", but with better grammar. I have a feeling, that if she decides to throw her name into the ring, her attidude will resonate with the Dem base.

Kennedy. IMHO, the current political ethos (for lack of a better word) could go for some invigorating young blood. I look at Trudeau in Canada and am kinda envious that they have a spry young leader - someone closer to my age. Someone who seems to be more "anti-stupid" than anything. (When people ask me my political party, I reply with, "Anti-stupid") At least that the impression I get from him.

Plus, JKIII might want, need, or the movers and shakers behind the scenes of the Democrats might want to "season" him a tad bit.
 
C_Felix said:
Gonna go way out on a limb here:

K. Harris & J. Kennedy III for the Dems in 2020.

Harris talks tough. I mean she has a Trump-esque style of "I don't take no bulls...", but with better grammar. I have a feeling, that if she decides to throw her name into the ring, her attidude will resonate with the Dem base.

Kennedy. IMHO, the current political ethos (for lack of a better word) could go for some invigorating young blood. I look at Trudeau in Canada and am kinda envious that they have a spry young leader - someone closer to my age. Someone who seems to be more "anti-stupid" than anything. (When people ask me my political party, I reply with, "Anti-stupid") At least that the impression I get from him.

Plus, JKIII might want, need, or the movers and shakers behind the scenes of the Democrats might want to "season" him a tad bit.
Click to expand...

Harris doesn't appear to have the foreign experience. I think Tammy Duckworth has better experience there, plus the military background chops. Harris could be a good Veep candidate.
 
LSSBB said:
Harris doesn't appear to have the foreign experience. I think Tammy Duckworth has better experience there, plus the military background chops. Harris could be a good Veep candidate.
Click to expand...

Didn't she come up with the "cadet bone spurs" epithet? Doesn't seem to have a lot of the Clinton negatives either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom