• 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.
In broad strokes, I'm sure you're right. That said...

I haven't taken Mayor Pete seriously and I wouldn't vote for him because (1) I fear he would lose the general due to his sexuality and (2) he won't be nominated in any case. Maybe I'm in the dark and I'm missing something that justifies these labels you're attaching to him.

He's not on board with Medicare for all. That's smart and realistic. Medicare for all is a pipe dream on a good day. It's 200 proof, unadulterated fantasy. We may as well debate Lord of the Rings plot lines. Ditto free college for all.

It seems like "smart and thoughtful" have become dirty words.

It's not that they're dirty, it's that I genuinely don't see him as standing out from the rest of the field in those respects, and most certainly not above the rest. He's more well-spoken than Joe Biden, but that guy's been famous for foot-in-mouth disease. When it comes to policy, he's also "meh". He doesn't seem to get, for example, that restricting "free" public colleges to some arbitrary income level is just begging for it to be attacked - likely along racial lines, same as every other program for the poor.

All I've seen from Pete so far is "mayor of a college town" - and his two big programs were a failed housing restoration effort, and a million dollars spent in courts hiding tapes where racist cops apparently conspire with others to remake the PD Ferguson-style (possibly to hide the fact that some of his donors were among the "others", but we don't really know why). That puts him in the lower tier, frankly. He's not as completely odious as Tulsi Gabbard or Michael Bloomberg, but those two are the "How about you just join the GOP?" tier - and I think I've been clear on what I think about that party. He's also not "Um, I'm worried about your mental well-being these days" level with Biden. But compared to *any* of the rest? Nope. Not really seeing "likability" here either. This is the guy who all but told black activists that he didn't want their vote.

Um, what?

Now, I'll grant that there are a few candidates who I simply don't recognize when they show up, and can't even name. But I'd easily take Booker, Castro, Warren, Sanders, Harris, and likely Yang and Klobuchar before him, any day. I'd like a good doctor to spend some time with Biden, but as long as he's healthy, sure him too. Even if he's against legalizing weed at the federal level (state-level efforts are vastly more important here, in any case).
 
If it is a choice between Trump and Pete, the black community will choose Pete. I expect Pete to have issues winning the African American community over, but I think it can be done.

That's true for literally any D candidate, black Americans don't vote for Republicans. Turnout, however, is a different story altogether, but the anti-Trump turnout might make up for a weak candidate.

Winning over black voters if vital for winning the primary though. If he can't win over at least some of the community soon, his campaign is dead in the water.
 
Last edited:
While you all were freaking out about the electability of the top 4 against a red electoral college map, the guy with three state wide wins in a red state just stopped running.
 
Steve Bullock and Joe Sestak have dropped out. Not that nearly any of us here likely paid any notable attention to either.
 
That's true for literally any D candidate, black Americans don't vote for Republicans. Turnout, however, is a different story altogether, but the anti-Trump turnout might make up for a weak candidate.

Winning over black voters if vital for winning the primary though. If he can't win over at least some of the community soon, his campaign is dead in the water.

...I'm going to say something about Harris' supposed "unlikability" that may get some people a bit huffy.

I've pointed out before that the anti-Harris ADOS crap was mostly coming from Russian bots. But that was them playing on racial issues again. There's something a bit similar going on here, though.

Ain't it a bit odd that the same people fixated on her supposed awful campaign never want to look into, say, Beto's sudden polling collapse? Or how Pete demoted a black police chief for listening to tapes of white supremacist cops, and effectively protected the cops? How did this fall to The Young Turks, a goofy Youtube group so badly managed that they somehow managed to launch the asinine punditry of both David Rubin *and* Jimmy Dore? Shouldn't NYT be looking into that rather extraordinary issue with the mayor?

Or are they giving another loving interview to some Nazi wannabe? Or, you know, another hit piece from the Bloomberg campaign (Oh, you didn't know)? Of course, these same people couldn't be bothered to look into Toupee Fiasco's extensive racism/mob ties/money laundering/tax and banking fraud/etc. either...

Isn't it a bit odd that, for all the caterwauling about how "mean" she was to Gabbard...she was absolutely correct to note how happily Gabbard just flat-out agreed with whatever right-wing lies her interviewers said, or that she was cozy with the likes of Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson, which should be a severe concern to anyone who believes in equality under the law?

As obnoxious as Bernie Bros can be, when they say that MSNBC has all but frozen out Sanders...they do have a point.

Similarly, Harris online advocates are fierce, but when they say that the coverage of the only black woman in the race has been relentlessly negative almost from the start, despite still being ahead of several other people who are either ignored or treated more positively...they're right. And anyone who has seen how black women are often treated in the US will know exactly what's up here.

Is she perfect? Of course not, and I've pointed out several candidates that I also like.

But when I hear y'all wave her off and then talk about how Pete is just so smart and nice, I start to wonder if some of y'all are listening to punditry, instead of looking at the candidates themselves.

And as for the mystery of how Pete is unable to connect with black voters...it's no mystery at all. His record towards nonwhite people is garbage, and I've been saying it for months now - long before the Young Turks covered it, because people in South Bend were saying so, publicly and loudly. Not GOP-level "muslims should be banned from entering the country and should have to wear special armbands if their here" level, granted - which is to say, he doesn't actively invite Nazi comparisons, which isn't a bar so much as a buried power line in terms of getting over it. But definitely "Well, I do live in Maryland, I may vote for a third party, or just leave it blank" level.

And I'm speaking as a guy who grew up in a civil rights family, who was taught to vote in every election, and brought to the voting booth every election with my mother and grandfather as a child, and my extended family all call each other to demand that one another vote - only reason I don't vote early here is that it's faster in my pleasant suburb to go on election day.

(I'm also reminded of the fact that Sanders basically never bothered to try to win the black vote - a mistake which handed Clinton the entire south, and quite a few other states, in 2016.)
 

The ones who beat republicans in states where republicans win.

But let's continue looking for people to beat republicans in the electoral college by looking at the states...

...checks notes
...

Delaware, Maryland, and Vermont.
 
...I'm going to say something about Harris' supposed "unlikability" that may get some people a bit huffy.

snipped for brevity

I think the the hatred of Copmala from the progressive wing of the party is quite real. Kamala's history as a DA is not seen as a positive. Given the disproportionate damage the criminal justice system does to black communities, I'm sure much of that distaste is very real. The "tough on crime" democrat is a bit of an outdated political model.

I can't say why she isn't more popular among the more conservative wings of the party that support Biden or Pete. I would agree with your analysis of Pete. His saving grace is that he was the mayor of a small town, so his racist police department doesn't make national headlines frequently enough to tar him as ineffective. If Biden were to start to seriously fail, I wonder if his support might transfer to her.
 
Last edited:
The ones who beat republicans in states where republicans win.

But let's continue looking for people to beat republicans in the electoral college by looking at the states...

...checks notes
...

Delaware, Maryland, and Vermont.

Maybe they should just run a Republican. Is Romney available?
 
I've been kind of changing my attitude on Klobuchar as positive, neutral, then positive as she seems to fade. I think she is a practical politician.

I don't mind Harris being a politician and she can see how far it goes, but somehow her speech manners always annoyed me. So when she starts to speak, I listen to the voice rather than what the words mean.

So a minor point. I hate Trump in 3 or 4 dimensions, in every possible way.
:eek:
 
(I'm also reminded of the fact that Sanders basically never bothered to try to win the black vote - a mistake which handed Clinton the entire south, and quite a few other states, in 2016.)

Recent NYT interactive on point, explains why Biden is stronger than he might seem so long as he retains high levels of support among African American primary voters.
 
Last edited:
That's true for literally any D candidate, black Americans don't vote for Republicans. Turnout, however, is a different story altogether, but the anti-Trump turnout might make up for a weak candidate.

Winning over black voters if vital for winning the primary though. If he can't win over at least some of the community soon, his campaign is dead in the water.

It's not as vital in the primaries outside of a few Southern states like SC.
 
No, it's not. That's one commonality we have with each other, but it's not the only difference we have from the rest of society.
Straight or gay, a lot of people seem to be hard-wired to form couples. It's not necessarily out of pressure to conform.

I think Buttgieg is going to have a different problem: His name is too weird. But then, we elected Barack Hussein Obama 7 years after 9/11.

Do you think you'd dislike Buttgieg just as much of he were straight?
 
I've been kind of changing my attitude on Klobuchar as positive, neutral, then positive as she seems to fade. I think she is a practical politician.

I don't mind Harris being a politician and she can see how far it goes, but somehow her speech manners always annoyed me. So when she starts to speak, I listen to the voice rather than what the words mean.

So a minor point. I hate Trump in 3 or 4 dimensions, in every possible way.
:eek:

I hate Trump's speech cadence. But the problem really is I KNOW he's going to say something incredibly self centered, or awful or he will be lying. And sometimes all 3 at once.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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