2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

[Brainster]

Point well made.

A nitpick though -- I don't think Dukakis fits the model.

Cuomo and Hart probably would have fit better, but Cuomo didn't run and Hart imploded in 1987 with the whole Donna Rice thing, withdrawing from the campaign and then trying to get back in at the last minute.

 

[Delvo]

I don't know of a definition of this "turn" concept that could apply to anybody but Hillary. I've never seen anything else like the way the Hillary wing of the Democrats kept obsessively pushing and pushing her at us over & over & over since Bill was President. If there's anybody else who ever had a "turn", then an entirely different word is needed for the Hillary thing.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't think she got the nomination because it was her turn. I think that she got the nomination despite the fact that it was her turn. Certainly very few political observers thought going into the 2016 Democratic primaries that Hillary was going to have a difficult time of it against a 75-year-old democratic socialist.

But she did get the nomination, and she was clearly the candidate whose turn it was. The Democrats just really seem to have something against going with the obvious candidate, and indeed if you look at their history, you can see why.

1956: Nominated Adlai Stevenson, candidate whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
1960: Nominated JFK, while Stevenson (who had been a sacrificial lamb in 1952 and 1956 against the overwhelmingly popular Eisenhower) was the man whose turn it was. Democrats won
1964: Sitting president nominated.
1968: Nominated Hubert Humphrey, candidate whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
1972: Nominated George McGovern, while Ed Muskie was arguably the candidate whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
1976: Nominated Jimmy Carter. I don't know if there really was a candidate whose turn it was; you could argue Sarge Shriver (who had been McGovern's running mate in 1972). Democrats won.
1980: Sitting president nominated.
1984: Nominated Walter Mondale, whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
1988: Nominated Michael Dukakis, whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
1992: Nominated Bill Clinton. You could make an argument for Sam Nunn or Mario Cuomo as being whose turn it was, but neither of them ran. Democrats won.
1996: Sitting president nominated.
2000: Nominated Al Gore, whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
2004: Nominated John Kerry, whose turn it was. Democrats lost.
2008: Nominated Barack Obama, while Hillary Clinton was clearly the candidate whose turn it was. Democrats won.
2012: Sitting president nominated.
2016: Nominated Hillary Clinton, whose turn it was. Democrats lost.

It's a small sample, but it sure looks like when the Democrats go for the candidate whose turn it is (other than sitting presidents) they lose.

I'm not sure I agree with your analysis...but good point.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm not sure how "Hillary was run because it was 'her turn'" got turned into something that got made up.

"Her Turn" was literally considered for her campaign slogan by her own campaign.

 

[Imhotep]

I'm not sure how "Hillary was run because it was 'her turn'" got turned into something that got made up.

"Her Turn" was literally considered for her campaign slogan by her own campaign.

I'm not sure I understand your point. Aren't campaign slogans "made up"? Isn't basically all politics outside of policy "made up"?

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm not sure I understand your point. Aren't campaign slogans "made up"? Isn't basically all politics outside of policy "made up"?

That people seeing an.... entitlement (maybe not exactly the word, but close) angle to Hillary Clinton's campaign aren't just making it up out of whole cloth.

 

[Segnosaur]

A bit tangentally related to the topic...

Some early estimates (based on 2018 mid-term results and Trump approval ratings) have the Democrats winning the 2020 election by ether 54 or 44 electoral votes (depending on how various factors are weighted).

https://observer.com/2018/12/2020-trump-electoral-college-vote-prediction/

Now, the article does point out that there are a lot of unknowns... potential 3rd party runs, primary challengers, etc. Plus its pretty early, so the results should be viewed with some skepticism.

 

[JoeMorgue]

And 3 seconds before the moment he won Trump had... like a 20% chance to win and that was from the polls/sources that were widely criticized for being too bullish on Trump.

 

[Brainster]

Deval Patrick says thanks, but no thanks:

"After a lot of conversation, reflection and prayer, I've decided that a 2020 campaign for president is not for me. I've been overwhelmed by advice and encouragement from people from all over the country, known and unknown," Patrick said in a Facebook post.
"But knowing that the cruelty of our elections process would ultimately splash back on people whom Diane and I love, but who hadn't signed up for the journey, was more than I could ask," he said.

Patrick probably missed his window; he should have run in 2016.

 

[crescent]

And 3 seconds before the moment he won Trump had... like a 20% chance to win and that was from the polls/sources that were widely criticized for being too bullish on Trump.

Closer to 30%. The day before the election they gave Trump a 29% probability of winning. Just a few days before they had it as high as 35%. They were off, but not as far off as many people "remember" it to be.

Polling ended up being pretty close for this (2018) election, as I mentioned earlier in the thread.

ETA: Earlier in this other thread, that is.

 

[Segnosaur]

And 3 seconds before the moment he won Trump had... like a 20% chance to win and that was from the polls/sources that were widely criticized for being too bullish on Trump.

Closer to 30%. The day before the election they gave Trump a 29% probability of winning. Just a few days before they had it as high as 35%. They were off, but not as far off as many people "remember" it to be.

Polling ended up being pretty close for this (2018) election, as I mentioned earlier in the thread.

Yeah, and even at 20% (or 29%) chance of victory, its not too far fetched for someone to win. Its not like predicting a snowstorm in July... a 20% chance means that Trump would have won 1 out of 5 elections.

Admittedly, I'm surprised at the fact that Trump won. And while part of that was due to polling predicting a Democratic victory, the biggest reason why I thought Trump would lose was because his campaign was what was called at the time a "dumpster fire", with accusations of racism, incompetence, etc.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Again I get that Trump winning didn't... break the concept of polling or statistics.

I'm just saying everything about Trump now is the same the same that was about Trump then and we got to take that into account.

Trump, love him or hate him, is a man that the traditional rules have a hard time accounting for.

 

[Baylor]

Although the poll notes that Warren, Harris and Booker are polling in the low single digits, the fact is that they will have plenty of visibility over the next year, while it is hard to imagine Beto getting a lot of airtime.

I think those polls are over-representing white people and I think both those candidates would do well in the primaries. My guess is Spartacus will get the 2020 Democratic ticket and they're grooming that whore Harris for a '28-'32 run. She's a wet dream for the Democrats being a mystery meat ethnic woman. She's hoping to break the glass ceiling by being the first sex worker to be elected president.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I think those polls are over-representing white people and I think both those candidates would do well in the primaries. My guess is Spartacus will get the 2020 Democratic ticket and they're grooming that whore Harris for a '28-'32 run. She's a wet dream for the Democrats being a mystery meat ethnic woman. She's hoping to break the glass ceiling by being the first sex worker to be elected president.

I have this thing about preserving most ignoble postings for posterity. This, overall, is pretty damned disgusting.

 

[angrysoba]

Deval Patrick says thanks, but no thanks:



Patrick probably missed his window; he should have run in 2016.

It wasn’t his turn.

 

[angrysoba]

Again I get that Trump winning didn't... break the concept of polling or statistics.

I'm just saying everything about Trump now is the same the same that was about Trump then and we got to take that into account.

Trump, love him or hate him, is a man that the traditional rules have a hard time accounting for.

Absolutely. I am amazed that there are already people spouting the wisdom that Trump is bound to lose (not being said here, I will add), despite the fact there is not even a clear Democratic candidate.

 

[angrysoba]

I think those polls are over-representing white people and I think both those candidates would do well in the primaries. My guess is Spartacus will get the 2020 Democratic ticket and they're grooming that whore Harris for a '28-'32 run. She's a wet dream for the Democrats being a mystery meat ethnic woman. She's hoping to break the glass ceiling by being the first sex worker to be elected president.

I don’t even want to know which gutter you have been swilling this from.

 

[varwoche]

I don’t even want to know which gutter you have been swilling this from.

I hear you. Ugly, bizarre, and big shock, brace yourself, false.

Sometimes it's informative to know the source. A few minutes with google suggests this could be original work. When I ponder Baylor's outstanding qualities, I'll be sure not to think of him/her as a copy-paste phony.

 

[Distracted1]

I think those polls are over-representing white people and I think both those candidates would do well in the primaries. My guess is Spartacus will get the 2020 Democratic ticket and they're grooming that whore Harris for a '28-'32 run. She's a wet dream for the Democrats being a mystery meat ethnic woman. She's hoping to break the glass ceiling by being the first sex worker to be elected president.

For gods' sake man, stop sugar coating it, tell us how you really feel.

 

[Hellbound]

You know what? I'd vote an actual sex worker for President.

I mean, they know how to get along with people, they can work through complicated situations, they have practice at exercising discretion...

And contrary to most of our politicians, at least when they **** you, they'll do it well