• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker - Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Shrike said:
But noooOOOooo, the DNC forced HRC down our throats, robbed themselves of a progressive candidate who could have really motivated huge numbers of disaffected (non)voters, pissed off all the Bernie Bros who either stayed home or voted 3rd party, and by the slimmest of margins handed Trump to the world.
Click to expand...
Here's what I don't understand about Bernie's crowd, though. Even assuming his platform would have motivated voters enough to beat Trump, what did they expect his administration could have actually achieved? I wasn't voting for a set of principles. I was voting for a candidate who might do some realistic horse trading and get something done in health care and immigration. I thought her Supreme Court picks could get past a GOP Senate. I didn't mind that she was tight with Wall Street, because getting them on board with policy changes matters. What I trusted her to get right wasn't ideological purity; it was pragmatism. My perception of her was that she was a wonk. That she would drill down into the ACA and come up with incremental improvements, because she would actually want workable legislation. My personal feelings didn't factor in at all. I didn't really have any. I do remember at some point thinking she was "shrill" but then I concluded that was mainly because I wasn't used to 60-something female leaders. Clinton seemed like a reasonable place to start.

So then Bernie exhorts the whole blue end of the spectrum to vote for Clinton and what happens? Apparently, a good many of his fans ignore him.

Hillary WAS the conservative choice in 2016. I don't want Warren or whoever to start tacking too far left. Ultimately it did not help Bernie and it didn't help the party. I never really understood that whole phenomenon.
 
The above might have been better in the Dem candidate's thread. If I can figure out how, I'll copy & paste but here it is for now.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Is that a requirement for getting the Democratic Party nomination?
Click to expand...

I'm sure there is no written requirement. But so what? It's not like anyone said he couldn't run.

Do you agree or disagree that the party should put a thumb on the scales when someone who isn't a card-carrying member is in the primary? (I make no claim as to whether or not that happened, but your statement can be easily interpreted to be defending the idea in concept).
Click to expand...

Let me be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the DEMOCRATIC national committee having a stated preference for candidates who say they are democrats. Of course, your "tip the scales" comment is pretty vague - what, exactly, did they do to "tip the scales"? Did they give her money they didn't give him? Oh wait, no they didn't. In fact, SHE gave them money to fund other candidates, and he didn't. That is another reason why they would favor her.

The DNC has no obligation to view all candidates the same. For example, if someone who was a lifelong republican decided to run for the democratic ticket because they don't think they could beat the republican field, do you think they should support them the same as an actual democrat?
 
Hilary is saying she is "under enormous pressure" to run in 2020.
Don't, just don't. Frankly, you are going to make a fool of yourself if you do.
'
 
pgwenthold said:
Is Bernie a democrat yet?
Click to expand...
Who cares? If the DNC had any sense they should've seen that a progressive candidate could have greatly increased turnout when support for HRC was "meh" outside the Convention bubble.

But the Bernie Bros aren't off the hook, either. Those idiots didn't show up, voted for Jill freaking Stein, etc. and absolutely deserve to share the blame for Trump 1.0.

2020 ain't no time for no purity test!
 
Minoosh said:
Here's what I don't understand about Bernie's crowd, though.
Click to expand...
The Bernie crowd were complete morons. I was excited by the prospect of his candidacy because he was a fresh, progressive voice for real change. But then he didn't win in the primary, and Clinton won the nomination. So I supported her despite her being conservative and boring because the alternative was Trump.

But, had Clinton not run, perhaps some other less-hated person would have won the nomination and performed marginally well enough in the Electoral College to have saved us from this crap.
 
The Shrike said:
No you didn't. The DNC pre-annointed Clinton long before the primaries. She would never have been running in the first place if the DNC had any clue to how unpopular she was outside the bubble of the people most likely to participate in the Convention.
Click to expand...

Wow! What TOTAL revisionist NONSENSE! I can show you lots of polls showing Hillary Clinton to be ENORMOUSLY popular in 2014. You're confusing what her favorability ratings were after two years of GOP hatchet work because they believed she would be the Democratic nomination. You also don't seem to grasp who the DNC is. It is totally influenced by the President when he is in power. Go ahead and look who ran the DNC in 2016. It was staffed almost entirely with people who owed their allegiance to the Clintons.

Bernie was NEVER EVER going to have the backing of the DNC unless he could secure the nomination. To begin with, Hillary was a lifelong Democrat. Bernie although he caucused with the Democrats NEVER was one until the 2016 campaign.

BTW, Hillary had DNC support in 2008 as well. But somehow Obama won the nomination.
 
kellyb said:
Is anyone else sensing that the era of political campaign "implosions" is probably mostly over?

I think the internet has maybe killed CNN/MSNBC/ABC's ability to determine 90% (or whatever) of political reality and make things like the Howard Dean "scream" a death sentence for a candidate.
Click to expand...

I'm always amused at this particular attempt to reconstruct reality. Dean's scream didn't kill him (although I did it quite amusing). What people forget is that Dean finished a poor third that night, at 18% after being the heavy favorite only a few weeks earlier. That was what dealt a crippling blow to the campaign, not the scream.

Biden may not implode, but that recent poll of Iowa with Buttigieg in front may indicate he's unraveling.
 
acbytesla said:
Wow! What TOTAL revisionist NONSENSE!
Click to expand...
Strong words for such a self-refuting post. To wit:

acbytesla said:
I can show you lots of polls showing Hillary Clinton to be ENORMOUSLY popular in 2014.
Click to expand...
So you've already discounted all the people who were snookered into buying the "vast right wing conspiracy" she decried in 1998 that had already been in full swing since at least 1995. Millions of people (including Democrats and former Democrats) were by 1995 already sick of the Clintons. They had good reason to be suspicious of "Slick Willy" but because of #misogyny they really couldn't stand Hillary. My parents' generation of Democrats decided they didn't like her way back in 1993, when she tried to do more as First Lady than host dinner parties.

Mind you, I'm not defending this, I'm just being honest. An entire generation had already written off Hillary Rodham Clinton by the mid-1990s. Benghazi and the emails were just new kindling for that pyre.

acbytesla said:
You also don't seem to grasp who the DNC is. ... It was staffed almost entirely with people who owed their allegiance to the Clintons.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point. Their bubble was full to bursting with rabid Clinton fans "ready" for the first female President. Meanwhile, the rest of the Democratic electorate variously rolled their eyes and shrugged their shoulders at that prospect.

acbytesla said:
Bernie was NEVER EVER going to have the backing of the DNC unless he could secure the nomination.
Click to expand...
Who cares? Why do folks keep bringing up Sanders? I'm not. Just maybe there are criticisms to be lodged against the DNC that have nothing to do with Bernie Sanders' failure to win the nomination.

acbytesla said:
BTW, Hillary had DNC support in 2008 as well. But somehow Obama won the nomination.
Click to expand...
Exactly. She was sooooo popular, had all the establishment behind her, but mister "community organizer" who hadn't even served a single Senate term beat her handily. You'd think that would have been a wake-up call that the Presidency is not something you just wait your turn to have handed you. You have to win it. The fact that the newcomer – black and a bit muslim-y to boot – beat her out should have sent alarm bells to the DNC that she was not an inspiring candidate.

But make no mistake, my criticisms are by no means limited to the DNC. Those Bernie Bros and others who didn't come out to vote for Clinton are even worse. They saw the writing on the wall that Trump had to be soundly beaten, and they chose "purity" over sanity. Can't let that happen again.
 
Brainster said:
I'm always amused at this particular attempt to reconstruct reality. Dean's scream didn't kill him (although I did it quite amusing). What people forget is that Dean finished a poor third that night, at 18% after being the heavy favorite only a few weeks earlier. That was what dealt a crippling blow to the campaign, not the scream.

Biden may not implode, but that recent poll of Iowa with Buttigieg in front may indicate he's unraveling.
Click to expand...

I was super-apolitical back then, so I'm amused by the fact that you're amused. lol I only remember CNN obsessing over that scream, and then he totally dropped off the map.

I'm skeptical of your claim that the scream, and the CNN obsession with it, and his dropping off the map alltogether were completely unrelated, but whatever.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Just like in 2008. Bernie...
Click to expand...
The fact you keep bringing Sanders up is telling, though I'm not sure of exactly what. It's not Sanders sour-graping to criticize the DNC and HRC for the series of poor decisions that gifted Trump to the world. If the DNC and Democratic voters *still* haven't figured this out then Trump waltzes to re-election next November.

What Sanders hasn't figured out yet is that he definitely should not and will not be the Democratic nominee in 2020. He needs to pretty soon team up with Warren or whatever but ultimately, no matter what, steer his ardent supporters in the direction of the nominee.

We need the energy of a Sanders' rally in support of the 2020 nominee or we'll be returning to Trumpistan – perhaps with Queen Ivanka on the throne. Sound ridiculous? Yes. Any less diculous than a normal day on the Trump White House? Not so much.

"So on this day, I am proud(sniff) to pass on the presidency to my very very beautiful daughter Ivanka, creator of 14 millions jobs. Not a lot of people know that, but it's true. She(sniff!) would be having sex with me if I was just a little bit younger, am I right? And the Fake News media will covfefe... lock her... Ivanka! Ivanka! Ivanka!"
 
Ten posts have been moved to AAH for being off-topic. The subject is the 2020 Democratic nomination, not a post-mortem of the 2016 general election. As of this warning, please do not post here about Hillary Clinton. There are many, many other threads where such musings would be on-topic. Further breaches of Rule 11 will be met with stricter mod action. Thank you.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Loss Leader
 
Deval Patrick is apparently entering the race Thursday, satisfying everybody hereabouts who've been clamoring for him to throw his hat in the ring. What's that? Nobody's been clamoring? Yeah, I noticed that too.

So what does it mean? Patrick can't be deluded enough to think that he can win the nomination. Is there an intent to dilute support for Harris and Booker? Or from Warren in New Hampshire? Is he angling for the veep bid? From whom?

Oh, and please ignore my avatar.
 
Last edited:
I want to say this last thing about the second guessing on 2016 and essentially all elections. Changing any variable may or may not change the outcome. There really is no way to know. Election issues and campaigns vary with who is in it and what the political atmosphere at that moment.

I've thought for a while that it doesn't benefit the Democrats to nominate a candidate who is overly progressive, but I've come around to thinking that that moderate candidate might be just as problematic. What's most important is to find a candidate who can connect to the voters and issues are only one ingredient.
 
Brainster said:
Deval Patrick is apparently entering the race Thursday, satisfying everybody hereabouts who've been clamoring for him to throw his hat in the ring. What's that? Nobody's been clamoring? Yeah, I noticed that too.
Click to expand...

It gets better.
https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/06/25/bernard-sigh-sentencing-deval-patrick-massachusetts/
"The ex-brother-in-law of former Democratic Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has been sentenced to up to eight years in prison for raping his estranged wife.
...
In 2014, Patrick fired the head of the state’s Sex Offender Registry Board in part because she questioned why Sigh wasn’t required to register for a 1993 spousal rape conviction."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom