The Race for 2020: Democratic Candidates Part 2

I can’t post in part one. It’s locking up. Can someone please post a link to part 2 in there?

T.I.A

The Race for 2020: Democratic Candidates Part One

I still favor Jay Inslee, but if by some miracle a more popular Democratic contender develops and runs on a platform including climate change and issues that matter to the lowest common denominator (i.e. social welfare, sensible corporate tax structure, agriculture) I'll support that person.

I wonder how they're going to overcome crooked state politicos, bribed electoral voters, electronic voting machines and lack of election oversight though.

It will probably take a few rounds to get the proper names in the poll and it likely will change overtime.

If Amy, Kristin and Corey don’t pick up steam, they could be dropped to make room for some of the “other” candidates in the poll.

Especially if they stay at zero.

Pete jumping out of the gate here. Very interesting.

Poll bump.

Well, this is a gay board. I think we're more likely to support a gay candidate.

The DL I know can be very critical of gays so it’s still telling.

If Elizabeth Warren can just hang in there until some of these drop of she will do well.

When it’s down to her, Pete and Biden and a few others, it will get interesting.

Gillibrand is so irrelevant that OP misspelled both her first and last names.

Also, no one until you noticed, R11!

Klobuchar and O’Rourke are also misspelled.

Ugh I think Elizabeth Warren is the most genuinely good candidate but it doesn't seem like she has a chance.

Don’t sleep on Liz. She’s just waiting for the field to clear up.

[quote]Klobuchar and O’Rourke are also misspelled.

So OP is just an iliterall?

DL was locking up as I was posting this thread. I was holding the places and was going to correct the spelling but couldn’t.

Whoever starts part 3 can get the spelling on track.

Warren and Harris will eventually emerge as the front-runners.

O’Rourke and Buttigieg will be top VP picks.

The others are DOA. Biden and Sanders will both flame out early on.

I can see that.

Funny, R18. I think you’re wrong every count. It will be interesting to see.

[quote]Warren and Harris will eventually emerge as the front-runners.

I don't see that happening. At all. Neither of them will be the candidate.

Warren may be very smart, but she's way too liberal - and even worse she come's off as a nagging shrew. That's terrible to say, but it's true, and she'll get her ass kicked. I will say though, I highly doubt she would let Trump bully her in the debates the way HRC did. Harris is just not impressive at all. She'll win CA but she doesn't seem to be catching on anywhere else.

I don't know why people think Sanders will "flame out". (And I absolutely fucking DESPISE him and won't vote for him under any circumstances, in the primary or in the general.) He has an absolutely fanatically devoted fanbase who will follow him anywhere. The only way he gets out is by getting his ass kicked again, and thankfully this time there are less caucuses his deadbeat fans can swarm, or by dying/having a major health issue/wifey getting arrested. He AIN'T leaving willingly.

I want Biden just because this not-so-oddly timed smear campaign against him. Conflating non-sexual "touchy-feeliness" with sexual assault is beyond a slippery slope. It's dangerous.

I use to be for Kloubachar. That comb news made me like her. But I wanna fuck Mayor Pete. So, I switched alliances. Hopefully there's no nudies of him out there. Him and his husband met on one of the app's so it isn't to hard seeing it happen.

Warren filled out a Texas Bar Registration card claiming she was an "American Indian". If she did that, she sure as hell claimed she was an "American Indian" to get tenure at Univ Texas - a tenure her non-American Indian husband didn't get...

And UT Austin, U of Penn and Harvard do NOT hire graduates of U of Houston and Rutgers to teach in their Law Schools.

This'll come out and knock her completely out of the race.

Who cares.

The whole higher-education system and tenured positions are corrupt.

Nobody cares about her claiming to be a Native American. Her parents told her that she was, and DNA tests weren’t readily available back then.

She’ll get a pass on it.

Mayor Pete’s name problem would be worse if it were “L’Occitane Buttigieg”

Of all of the disparaging nicknames Trump has given his adversaries, "Pocahontas" is the one which will stick the longest. If Biden can be stuck with " being creepy" in the past, then she should be held accountable for her dishonesty. Pocahontas is DOA.

R27 higher education systems certainly do care. UT Austin went to SCOTUS last year to re-affirm their commitment to affirmative action both in accepting students and hiring staff. And UT Austin has a couple of Regents named by Republicans who would just love to go rifling through Warren's records.

[quote][R27] higher education systems certainly do care

I don’t think voters will care, because most voters think the higher education systems are corrupt anyway.

I think Klobuchar, Gillibrand, Castro and Booker can be counted out. I don't think Pete can do it... though I wish he could... and I think the Veep slot won't create a two white men ticket - that's probably Klobuchar or Harris. Klobuchar would be a better strategic pick, geographically. Who knows. If it's Biden, Veep is important because Veep is heir(ess) presumptive.

[quote]Warren may be very smart, but she's way too liberal - and even worse she come's off as a nagging shrew

I used to think so too, that she seemed like a nag.

But after seeing her townhall, I thought she came across as down-to-earth, genuine, and had a very good understanding of the issues she was talking about.

She's exhausting to listen to R33 - that horrible Okie accent doesn't help. And she seems to have COPD or something - all that huffing and puffing.

R34, given we have Trump right now I can't imagine why the fuck you're whining about the way Elizabeth Warren speaks. Seriously. Get some perspective.

She has much more experience than any of the other candidates, except Biden.

Warren is a sleeper candidate. Biden is the one to beat at this point.

People who call women shrews and nags should be ignored because they are sexist fucks.

I too have revised my impression of Warren after watching the town hall. I mostly liked her personality and she is certainly in command of her facts. But she does act corny and she can't carry it off. She may have branded herself as a scolding phony. I just don't think she's a contender. But she's an asset to the country, for sure.

Or,R38,speaking the truth.

No, R40.

Nope, R40, those words are code used by sexist fucks when talking about women. You can tell because they are only ever used to denigrate women, never men.

If she’s not the candidate, she will get a cabinet position for sure.

Is anything other than State or Treasury worth having? I always felt the Cabinet meant fuck all. I mean, Betsy DeVos, Wilbur Roth...

I still need to see Beto’s dick before I can commit.

I kinda feel that Mayor Pete is making Beto seem really stagey and affected. Anybody else?

I agree, r46.

Yeah, Mayor Pete took Beto’s whole young, hip, chill candidate vibe. Beto seems like he’s struggling to find his identity.

Honestly, Beto is too far right for most Democrats I think.

He would have been great running against Cornyn in Texas. He probably would have come closer to beat him than he did Cruz. Now he's going to lose this, and basically have no where to go.

Beto could be a good VP option, but I think Pete beats him there too...because Pete can deliver the Midwest.

Mayor Pete seems smarter and more capable than dithering Beto.

I wonder if Mayor Pete finds Beto hot?

[quote]Beto seems like he’s struggling to find his identity.

Like him or not, Beto defined his brand way before 2020 and it has been incredibly successful. He is pretty much nipping at Kamala's territory, the Southwest, this bodes well for him because Nevada, California, and Texas are part of the first leg of the primary.

[quote]Yeah, Mayor Pete took Beto’s whole young, hip, chill candidate vibe. Beto seems like he’s struggling to find his identity.

Time for another road trip! Watch the kids, I'm going for a drive.

Ok so sick and tired of straight people running everything into the ground. Especially conservative men.

It’s time to let gay people have a chance at the big one.

Pete can't deliver the Midwest FFS. He ran statewide in Indiana in 2010 and lost by 40% and Obama won Indiana in 2008. Blue collar Trump voters are not voting for a gay man. You can forget about it.

Beto can deliver Texas which is the key to the 2020 race. Nancy Pelosi: "Texas is Ground Zero in 2020". The GOP cannot win without Texas and only Beto can take it - which is why the Texas GOP has been trolling him relentlessly. They're scared shitless if Beto's on the ticket, it'll be a disaster for the GOP in all of Texas.

Beto has got the Latino vote locked up. That's Arizona and Nevada too. Kamala is probably the other strongest candidate but it doesn't do her any good to perform well with black people in red states - they aren't the majority. Dems aren't taking South Carolina. And otherwise Kamala can't take any red or purple states. She's way too California for flyover country. Beto crosses over. He's the only one who does. Texas Democrats are resourceful - they fuckin' have to be.

[quote]Blue collar Trump voters are not voting for a Democrat.

There, fixed that for you, R56.

Stop trying to chase racist, sexist, homophobic, pig-ignorant, Trump-voting white men. There's no success to be found there. And we don't want those assholes anyway.

R57 does not understand the Rust Belt states and their voters.

R58, I grew up in Ohio, so you lose.

Then explain how Democrats are going to win without those states?

Obama won some of them and became went to the White House. Hillary lost them all and went back to Chappaqua.

You're not very bright, R60.

You're not going to win those states by trying to go after racist sexist white guys. Trump & the GOP have those locked up, and by going after racist sexist white men, you depress the vote of women, LGBT, people of color, etc, etc. So the GOP wins.

But if you go after REAL people, ALL people, and inspire women, people of color, LGBT people, and more to get out and vote for you, you can win.

Dumbass.

Nobody's going to vote for "Republican Lite" when they can vote for the real thing. Trying to chase after Trump voters is a guaranteed losing game.

R60 if the Dems can take Texas - that's the jackpot. They don't need the Rust Belt.

The "Rust Belt" will return to the Dems if the candidate promises to do something about the problems that are specific to the region. Obama won the region twice; Hillary ignored it. People here just want the discussion to be about the economy, health care, and the environment, especially the areas around the Great Lakes. However, if the Dems continue to focus on reparations, sexism, and perceived socialism, the states will not go blue. So far, there are so many who hate Trump, but need to hear the candidates speak with them, not ignore them in favor of issues that are trendy on the coasts.

[quote]People here just want the discussion to be about the economy, health care, and the environment, especially the areas around the Great Lakes.

So many people have been saying this for 2 years, not just on DL. The fact that there are candidates who aren't making these issues a focal point is maddening.

If you back up from when the NYT report dropped, it was almost as if the leaker gave Barr until the congress deadline.

LOL. They are going to leak the whole report if it doesn’t get released lol.

Democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time. It’s nt either or.

It’s “this guy’s a crook, we are going to be so much better. We are going to fix infrastructure and take steps towards healing the environment and also will not take away your healthcare protections.”

Easy as pie.

Beto is outpacing Sanders and Harris and finishes third in the 1st quarter with 9.4 million dollars.

Also, this probably means Buttigieg is finishing the first quarter somewhere in 4th just behind Beto O'Rourke.

Klobuchar, Castro, and Warren have fallen behind Buttigieg's, so that only leaves Booker and Gillibrand as the possible spoilers.

R57, the poster you are lambasting literally pointed out that a mere two years earlier Obama, a black Democrat, won Indiana, including a whole lot of those union members.

Blue collar rednecks are NOT voting for Democrats. When Sherrod Brown was hinting he was going to run because 'he could get the blue collar rednecks voting for him', he neglected to mention he lost white working class men in 2018, getting only 38% of their vote.

There's no hope for these people, folks. Stop dreaming. They're racists, they're homophobes, they're sexists. They're assholes.

The democrats have triumphed every election since 2016. Let’s hope the trend continues.

Mayor Pete seems tired. It's a lot riding on the poor guy's shoulders.

Is mayor Pete a top or a bottom?

I’d bang Beto but marry Pete.

Go away, Lindsey!

R65, we need a brave insider to leak the whole thing like Daniel Ellsberg did with the Pentagon Papers.

Can they also leak Beto’s dick pics? Thanks!

R61 Preach! 👍🏻

R72 Mayor Pete is the top. One look at the Missus tells me the only way he could get hard is to be on his back, with his legs thrown over his shoulders.

[quote]Honestly, Beto is too far right for most Democrats I think.

Here's the gist of his speech in El Paso:

Economic and political democracy. Legalize the Dreamers. Comprehensive immigration reform with path to citizenship. Address root causes for refugees in their countries. First act will be a new Voting Rights Act, ending gerrymandering and allowing same day voter registration. Universal background checks and ban on assault weapon sales. Immediate climate change action. Criminal justice reform. Decriminalize marijuana and expunge records of those jailed for possession. End for-profit prisons, cash bail, and the school-to-prison pipeline. $15 minimum wage. Raise teachers' salaries. Strengthen unions. Universal medical care. Paid family leave. Universal pre-K. Debt-free college. Foreign policy agenda centered on Central / Latin America. End the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, end the love affairs with dictators. stand behind our allies.

And who's going to pay for this, Beto? Ridiculous Polyanna.

R80, he said he'll reverse the Trump tax cuts for the 1% and is in favor of the "wealth tax" concept.

How do any of the rest get the money for their generous promises? By raising budget revenue aka taxes. What other ways are there?

Beto made a great speech at Al Sharpton's event yesterday. Apparently Pete was there but didn't see his speech. Julian Castro gave the speech he gives everywhere complaining about his poor, pitiful granny and how he grew up on the wrong side of the tracks. Just like Elizabeth Warren.

[quote]Beto can deliver Texas which is the key to the 2020 race.

No. Beto cannot deliver Texas. 🙄 No one can. He couldn’t even win it for himself running against the universally loathed Ted Cruz. And Democrats absolutely do not need Texas. It’s lower on the priority list than actual winnable states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and even Indiana.

[quote]Yeah, Mayor Pete took Beto’s whole young, hip, chill candidate vibe. Beto seems like he’s struggling to find his identity.

Yeah, Pete stole Beto’s gig. Beto would be the darling of the media, and polling much higher, if Pete hadn’t emerged to remind people what true intelligence is. Pete is making him look bland and inauthentic. And Chasten is more interesting than Beto’s personality-free wife that just stares robotically at him when he speaks. Beto goes for road trips to try and figure out what to do with his life while Pete has doesn’t need to because he’s done substantive things at every stage.

To the person who thinks Beto can't win Texas: you don't know Texas. No way will Texans vote against a Texan and for a Yankee. Ain't gonna happen.

And sorry, Pete stans, no way will the industrial MidWest vote for a gay man. You're dreaming.

^^^yet he was elected in Indiana.

R85 blocked for sheer stupidity.

R85, he is from the Midwest and speaks to their concerns. Have any others, besides Tim Ryan done that? No, they're all trying to placate the fringe element of the left to be concerned about the area of the country the Dems abandoned.

We should send weekly updates of this poll to Gillibland (misspelling intentional) to prove to her why she needs to drop out right now.

R86, he lost by a lot in Indiana when he ran state-wide. He won in South Bend. South Bend has a high percentage of minorities and the 60% of the population that is white includes a whole lot of students from Notre Dame. It is not indicative of his ability to win over the Midwest and Rust Belt. The huge loss when he ran state-wide is more indicative of how he is going to perform in those areas. America will not elect a gay guy.

What I like about Gildabrand is that she took the fight to his hotel and gave him hell. Good for he

Her

Some people in this thread are delusional and think he can win. DL is not the real world.

[quote]running against the universally loathed Ted Cruz

This is getting ridiculous.

People told you a hundred times that Cruz is nowhere near universally hated IN TEXAS.

And that Texas isn't DC.

Speaking of Cruz, Cornyn runs for re-election next year and he is scared to death. The Beto effect added to Trump's threats of closing the border (which would be a total disaster for Texas) has got him even daring to criticize Trump in public.

[quote]No. Beto cannot deliver Texas. 🙄 No one can. He couldn’t even win it for himself running against the universally loathed Ted Cruz.

Err...Yes, Beto can definitely deliver Texas. In 2018 he came very close to defeating a very popular Ted Cruz. In 2020 Texas is a battleground state.

[quote]Obama won the region twice; Hillary ignored it.

Hillary did NOT fucking ignore it. Why the FUCK are assholes like you constantly lying about Hillary like this?!?

She did ignore it in favor of hanging out with Beyoncé and other Hollywood types.

R98, you're either misinformed or a malicious liar. Fuck off with your bullshit.

I think Hillary did do limited campaigning. That was 'old school' - go to massive fundraisers with millionaires, events with a cast of thousands, TV interviews. That was the way politics was played up till now. It's all changed.

Look at how they're campaigning now - little events, accent on grassroots, small donors. It's a whole new world and I think it's why Joe Biden will be unable to gain traction. He doesn't understand what has changed.

Look at the campaigns so far this year..

Beto should run for the second senate seat

. I hope that none of these candidates miss a chance to secure a statewide or regional races in order to not win. 20 something of them can’t win. So don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

Hell, more candidates are going to run. Tim Ryan announced, Michael Bennet, Seth Moulton and DL fave Eric Swalwell are all going to announce before the end of April.

Uhhhh this is getting a tad ridiculous.

Looking forward to boiling this number down to a manageable amount.

Although, come to think of it, the more the merrier. That was there’s a democrat for everyone.

Hillary ignored the Midwest. Take off your Hillary-colored glasses and figure out why a region that went for Obama suddenly went for Trump. She made few appearances, thinking that the region was going to her. It was her downfall.

Hillary ran on " Trump is a bad man. He's anti-women." Did not speak to Midwest concerns. He didn't either, but she was a known commodity.

[quote] Hillary ran on " Trump is a bad man. He's anti-women." Did not speak to Midwest concerns.

Really? What a crock of shit. But then again, you ignored any talk of politics in 2016 and voted with your gut feeling, didn't you?

[quote]In 2018 he came very close to defeating a very popular Ted Cruz.

Lol. No one anywhere would use the word ‘popular’ to describe Ted Cruz.

I miss the poll troll. Where is he?

[quote]Lol. No one anywhere would use the word ‘popular’ to describe Ted Cruz.

In TEXAS they would.

Figure it out already.

The PC crowd has brought one thing for certain - uncertainty. With the PC and SJW movements in the Dem party, people don't know what to do or how to act, lest someone be offended and they be labeled racist or sexist. Is the other person a " They"? Can I wear this, or am I going to be accused of cultural appropriation? Who is going to be offended is I say this or that? Being labeled a racist or sexist are the very worst things that can happen these days, so I'd better not say anything that might be construed as racist or sexist. The far left of the party has done the same thing as the far right of the Republican Party has done to its party; both are steamrolling over the moderates, who still make up the majority of both parties. However, at least with the Republicans, you know where you stand. You know the president is a liar, you know policies will favor the rich and white. Unfortunately, people are creatures of habit who will choose the known over the unknown. Unless the Dems get a candidate with a spine, who will disavow all of this PC nonsense of the far left of the party and attempt to bring sanity to the party, Trump will win again. He has solid base that will never abandon him. The only Dem approaching that is Bernie, but his base is smaller. The Dems get behind a straight shooter and they will draw some disillusioned moderate Repubs to the fold also. But, the socialists probably hope that Trump is re-elected, because then they will get in the news more, screaming their opposition. Would AOC have made the news as much if Hillary were pres? No. But now she's basking in the attention. Bernie would be a forgotten entity; but now his voice is heard again. Dems have accused the Repubs of doing better as the opposition party. We are seeing that now with the socialists.

Yeah but that’s artificial. Divisive issues are being drummed up online. They are not genuine issues.

Include that in your monologues people. Don’t just discuss the divisive issues, also discuss where they come from and who’s stirring the pot.

Otherwise the fake and unnecessary divisions will gel.

R111 is very irresponsible and unhelpful.

Ignore them at the peril of the election, R112. Where are they coming from? Harris, Warren, AOC, etc. These were not made up by Republicans. They might be stirred up by them, but the candidates will now be bogged down by these "issues" that their own candidates are forcing upon them to try to play up to specific groups. You are being irresponsible if you don't acknowledge that these divisive issues are threatening to being along another Trump presidency and, in the real sense, are unimportant. But they have originated with the Dems and now threaten any candidate who does not pass the arbitrary " purity" test, which will be different depending on which identity group is being courted. A candidate who says that these are not the issues that concern most Americans will win the hearts of the vast majority of voters, but will alienate whichever group chooses to be offended. Someone has to get the ball rolling and have his/her Sister Souljah moment.

[quote]Hell, more candidates are going to run. Tim Ryan announced, Michael Bennet, Seth Moulton and DL fave Eric Swalwell are all going to announce before the end of April.

I’m done with new candidates. Anyone who has not announced by April 1st... I will not even consider at this point.

Even if it's........................... Hillary!

I don't expect it will happen, but if the Democrats push a moderate, they will win. I know enough people who voted for Trump who didn't like him but didn't like Hillary more, and I know some Republicans who will trade parties if the right moderate Democrat runs.

Trump's core group are actually a minority, which makes me feel better when all the racists and gay-haters appear on television or sit beside me at the traffic light with their bumper stick.

I tell myself that, anyway, to make me feel better. They should move toward the center and pick up some disillusioned republicans and independents.

Trump's core group is actually a minority, grammarians. They are acting as a unit, which is single. Forgive me!

But , the far left has the biggest mouths. They have taken Trump's playbook and, just as in the case of moderate Republicans who didn't fight the radicalization of their party, the moderate Dems are allowing the socialist to run a bulldozer over their party. Neither side cares about the problems of real Americans, just their own small lobbying groups. Now, they have to run through Sharpton? We're fucked.

AOC and Bernie are the new faces of the Democratic Party. It’s all Socialism, all the time now!

Good luck to any moderate trying to win a Primary.

I can’t believe some idiots from the left tried to cannibalise Uncle Joe over a personal boundary issue that even the victims admit was non-sexual. Luckily it hasn’t worked. Democrats are their own worst enemy.

R120 nobody needs to try to destroy Joe Biden - he'll do it all by himself. He's a terrible campaigner. And when he can't hide behind Obama...

[quote]...figure out why a region that went for Obama suddenly went for Trump.

It's called sexism.

Convenient response, R122. One that is repeated by delusional Hillary supporters. She lost the region because she didn't speak to their concerns. These are the same concerns that still exist that the Dems are still ignoring in favor of all of the fake social justice crap that they are using to delude the gullible into voting for them. It's right out of Trump. But then, slogans are more convenient than actually having to acknowledge the truth.

Sure, R123. White male union members voted Repug. It was sexism. I live in the Midwest. Men here are fucking sexist. Do you remember the "make me a sandwich, bitch" signs? Of course you don't.

[quote]Hillary ignored the Midwest.

No, she emphatically didn't, R105. Take off your Hillary-bashing glasses and wake up to reality. You can even google this shit... she campaigned all over the Midwest, and had policies specifically targeting the issues Midwest people were having. It's not HER fault that you refused to pay attention.

R123, if you don't think sexism and racism are the PRIMARY reasons Trump won, then you're the delusional one.

[quote]if you don't think sexism and racism are the PRIMARY reasons Trump won, then you're the delusional one.

Yet these same “racist” Midwesterners voted for Obama just four years prior.

Kamala is toast. First, Jussie Smollett. Now, reparations for blacks.

[quote]Hillary ignored the Midwest. Take off your Hillary-colored glasses and figure out why a region that went for Obama suddenly went for Trump.

What happened was that the repugs severely limited and undermined voting rights. Obama had his 2 terms and he only cared about his legacy. I still can't comprehend how he was so totally toothless against all the republican shitstains. They ran all over him, they invited a foreign hostile country to undermine the fair (or whatever was left of it) election process and Obama did nothing.

You're delusional R119. Moderates won in 2018, not the BernieBros and Bernie's shtick has worn off. He still hasn't released his taxes.

R128, you’re being irresponsible by trying to stir the reparations pot.

Ask yourself, and your readers, where this arcane issue came from and who does it benefit to bring up a dormant wedge issue and re-introduce it to the Democratic Party?

Who does that benefit.

It’s not enough anymore to just repeat wedge issues. It is nessesary to give the full context of the reason for even discussing the issue. Who is drumming it up and why. Who benefits from a divided Democratic Party?

Laziness is not going to fly in 2020.

Those who continually bring up Hillary in a negative way need to also ask themselves what role they are playing in promoting the divisions.

Let’s not accept anymore anti-democratic posts that promote fascism and propaganda tactics. Let’s clean this place up and shut down the chaos and divisions.

There is room for many opinions in the party as long as it’s productive.

People keep bringing up Hillary because they don’t want this year’s candidate to repeat all the mistakes she made... which Biden seems on track to do.

Bernie declines to say when he will release his tax returns

What the fuck is in Bernie's taxes. Bet it has something to do with his wife's screwing over Burlington College + they're a lot richer than they pretend to be.

Go Liz!

It looks like Kristin finally got one vote.

If Bernie doesn't release his taxes, he needs to be banned from the debates. He's giving Trump cover for his tax bullshit at this point. Fucking assholes, both.

....

Well, Kamala Harris's strategy to gain the White House is certainly neglecting certain parts of the country, just showing that she only is the candidate of the coasts. Not one stop in the middle of the country, where the Dems must win to be elected.

Yesterday Beto O'Rourke attacked Netanyahu calling him a racist (quite right). And today Bernie announced the US couldn't take any more immigrants coming through the Southern border. Gee, sounding awfully like Donald Trump.

The other Michael Steel (Boehner's CoS) was telling Chris Matthews tonight that, unlike what Obama said in Germany, the Dem candidates need to take the gloves off and start knocking some candidates out of the race quickly. Because if they all stick around too long to be splitting the non-Bernie vote instead of consolidating behind someone, Bernie's gonna come on top at the convention, and in a matchup between Trump and Bernie the Dems are toast.

Swalwell joined in tonight....

R143, he’s got a point, and that’s probably why Bernie’s doing as well as he is. A bunch of unknowns vs the one name a lot of people have heard before. And Bernie is unelectable.

R145, I thought so too. Bernie is doing well because - as he also said and we knew it already - his supporters will stick with him no matter what. It's like the mirror image of Trump's base.

Only 11 of the people who've announced so far have met the criteria to get into the debates. Castro hasn't even met the donor threshold. I think the DNC is going to have to raise the thresholds a little more.

And, WTF is wrong with some of these people? They have nothing unique to offer. They are the 20th person to get in. They had to look at the 20 other people and go, "Nah, I'm better than all of them!". Every time someone new enters now, I automatically hate them because it's nothing but an ego job at this point.

Most of them are trying to sell books or get jobs as pundits on cable news or put their names out there to get cabinet positions in a Dem administration.

[quote] I thought so too. Bernie is doing well because - as he also said and we knew it already - his supporters will stick with him no matter what. It's like the mirror image of Trump's base.

I wonder how much of that was due to Tad Devine and Paul Manafort. What is it about pro-Russia candidates' messaging that switches off the critical thinking switch and gathers followers?

Bernie's support isn't about Russia.

His supporters are anti-establishment and more authoritarian. That's the common thread with Trump's base.

The difference is that Berners are mostly leftists, while Trump's are mostly hard right. But both extremes have the tendency to fall into a cult of personality type support.

Life-long Democrat here. Anyone but Bernie will get my vote. I will never, ever vote for that quasi-Democrat friend of Putin. Not in a million years.

I just hope Bernie'll drop dead before 2020. Biden too. They're too damn old.

Eric Swalwell. There's a pic of him with Beto O'Rourke and Tulsi Gabbard - they all arrived in Congress at the same time. Now they're all running for President. Who thinks Beto and Tulsi have fucked?

Folks, we're doomed. Twitter is nothing but BernieBros ripping Democrats apart, feminists ripping male candidates apart, black twitter ripping everyone apart except for Kamala. .. and some of them ripping her apart "she's a cop".

There is NO way we can beat Trump. We'll destroy ourselves before then.

NY Times was reporting the disparity between what 'woke' social media wants in a candidate and what the vast majority of Democrats who aren't on social media care about. Most Democrats aren't woke, they're moderate and they want a white guy with moderate views who can beat Trump.

The media and woke social media of course want the candidate who will prove their wokeness.

FFS.

The feminists and the blacks ripping Democrats apart really pisses me off. You know what Democrats want? Somebody who doesn’t hate our guts and isn’t trying to bring back Jim Crow and the Handmaid’s Tale. The whitest, malest, most middle of the road Democrat won’t do that.

A white male middle of the road Democrat will bring back Jim Crow? Huh?

Support Tim Ryan in the primaries. Seriously. He can take the non-coastal states early on and take the wind out of the sails of the candidates being pushed by woke Twitter.

What I remember from past Democratic candidates races was press and hubbub for the "extreme" candidates (does anyone remember Dennis Kucinich? If the readership demographic skews middle-aged/old Americans, they should) then the more 'corporate/moderate' candidates were positioned at the center of a stage platform, given more time and camera exposure.

I feel that a moderate male candidate will be the frontrunner, eventually. I believe from the 2016 election a large enough percentage of the electorate votes on the physical attributes of what they're conditioned to believe is a good leader, nothing about public service history or accomplishments. A tall male who is an effective orator and who has shown through legislative action and policy to be anti-Dotard would capture the distressingly large number of sexist, reactionary voters who are too self-respecting or too patriotic to bring themselves to vote Republican.

R158, sounds like Tim Ryan to me! Although I think he gets a little clumsy sometimes when he's speaking, it's easy to understand what he's trying to communicate.

r159 what are the differences between Rep. Tim Ryan and Gov. Jay Inslee? I know Ryan wrote [italic]A Mindful Nation[/italic], an Inslee was the first to sign into law a net neutrality policy for Washington state, opposing Ajit Pai's FCC ruling.

Jay Inslee is centering his campaign on climate change. Tim Ryan's main proposal is to make sure future tech like solar panels and electric vehicles, batteries, and charging stations are built in the U.S. Tim's platform will speak more to middle America. He's from Ohio and played football in college. Come on, tell that won't play well with working class people!

I also know that climate change is one of Inslee's top issues. Hawaii, North Carolina, Texas, California, Florida among many other states have suffered extreme weather calamities. Everyone regardless of colour, income, nationality, race, creed and gender identification in a populated area devastated by flood or fire is affected. The electorate among the bottom 99% of Americans would have to be dim and/or monomaniacal to believe that these calamities won't persist or grow in magnitude and frequency.

Jay Inslee also played football.

I like Jay but I think his messaging is off. Tim Ryan's messaging is about the economy, jobs, and how China will continue to grow at our expense if we don't do something about it. If you're worried about losing your job or your town going under if the local factory closes climate change isn't an immediate concern. I don't disagree with Jay on climate change but basing his entire campaign around it is a giant misstep.

Swalwell looks like a greasy mouthbreather.

Climate change isn’t going to bring in disenchanted Republicans who hate Trump but are still ignorant. A moderate candidate with broader appeal might.

R156, it says “won’t bring back Jim Crow.” Won’t.

This is on twitter right now: Eric Swalwell says he wants to bring both Democrats and Republicans into his administration.

As someone responded, I’m not voting for Democrats to get Republicans.

Bernie Sanders just came out with his radical Medicare for All which is way, way over the top. Anybody who's used European healthcare systems knows this is totally goofy.

As if that weren't bad enough: Kamala, Cory, Liz and Kirstein endorsed it!

Here comes Trump for a second term...

[quote]Eric Swalwell says he wants to bring both Democrats and Republicans into his administration

Some of candidates don't know when to keep their mouth shut.

[quote]Here comes Trump for a second term...

Keep telling yourself that.

There already is a Medicare For All bill (H.R. 1384) with 107 Representative co-sponsors.

Aren't bills introduced into the House of Representatives first?

Bernie announced with great fanfare today HIS Senate bill. There is a bill (which has bipartisan support) called Medicare for America in the House which has been endorsed by Pelosi which allows people to keep private insurance or buy-into a public option.

R166 - Ugh. Nope, he's lost my interest. None of the current GOP have ever stood up to the idiot-in-chief in any way that is meaningful beyond stern words. After decades of shitty antics and policies by that political party, I don't trust anyone who identifies as Republican. Rinse them all down the toilet of irrelevance.

Ah, yes. The toilet of irrelevance…

The Democrats all basically believe the same things. They have the same platforms with slightly different approaches and timetables. What we need is to break all of it down into amazing soundbites. Ten words or less for each important issue and everyone stays on message stating those ten words over and over and over until they soak into the dense psyches of the American populace.

CNN is having back to back Town Halls April 22. This is about youth issues.

The preview of the Town Hall makes it 'Must See."

I don't know much about Tim Ryan except when he challenged Nancy for Dem leader in the House. It didn't endear him to me --

But his manner can be effective in a campaign against Trump. He's ambitious and doesn't suffer fools gladly. I can see him taking on Trump and the GOP aggressively.

Mayor Pete is doing better than expected. It's still early in the game but he's making inroads in Iowa.

Mayor Pete's getting saturation fawning coverage on cable news so it isn't surprising. But as he gets higher in the polls, oppo research will start chiming in. And his record in South Bend - the only experience he can refer to - won't stand up to scrutiny.

Mayor Pete is on Ellen today.

Mayor Pete's on TV way too much. He's getting badly overexposed.

Considering a lot of people don’t know anything about him, he doesn’t have any choice. He has to keep the momentum going.

Why did Chasten come up on stage during Ellen and why did it look like he was wearing a diaper?

Chasten needs to go.

R183 did not happen. I watched it. Chasten stayed in the audience and Ellen talked about him briefly.

Pete did pretty well. Ellen taught the audience how to say “Boot-edge-edge” and made them practice it. Pete talked about stuff he’s said at other venues. I got the impression that audience didn’t really know who he was. So it was a good show for him to be on. The audience was almost all frauish women. A few guys. That’s definitely a group Pete needs to engage.

Buttigieg has replaced Beto.

R181 = Moron

What is “badly over exposed”? Go back to whacking off to your Beto poster.

Mayor Pete will be Rachel Maddow’s guest Monday night.

Mayor Pete just dismissed "Identity Politics" as something he doesn't get.

Listen here, you fucking idiot, "Identity Politics" is the only reason you're fucking married.

Identity Politics is a RWNJ smear to dismiss and undermine civil rights.

Mayor Pete has been consistently disappointing with his utter tone-deafness and willingness to chase after RWNJs.

Mayor Pete also recently said he was open to discussing slavery reparations, which crossed him off my list. As cool as his rise has been (from a gay point of view), his problem is that third is not much better than 8th. You still have to try and knock off one of the geezers.

Also, Mayor Pete isn't really a good choice for VP. Assuming one of Biden or the Socialist win, the VP virtually HAS to be a woman, preferably one of color. I still think he's running for some Cabinet spot. He has no real chance of winning, (and he would have even LESS of a chance if he were straight - he isn't well known enough and doesn't have near enough experience). His gayness is the only reason anyone is paying any attention to him at all.

R190, the problem is they all either want to discuss reparations or are openly for it. I think Andrew Yang is the only one who said he's not for it but wants to help the black community in other ways. His candidacy is going nowhere however.

Mayor Pete talks really well. He's inspirational.

[quote]Mayor Pete will be Rachel Maddow’s guest Monday night.

Which one is sitting on the left?

[quote][R183] did not happen. I watched it. Chasten stayed in the audience and Ellen talked about him briefly.

Then you didn't watch the whole thing, asshole. Right at the end of the interview, Chasten waddled up on stage from the audience with his paunch and huge ass making it look like he had a diaper on under his baggy pants and the three of them stood there chatting a little bit while the audience applauded and they went to commercial. Now, fuck off talking about shit you don't even bother to verify while calling someone a liar.

Sorry, R194, that we're not treating your kindness and towering intellect with the respect it deserves.

Neither Pete nor Chasten is hot. We have to deal with this.

I"m sizzling hot.

r190 = RACIST ASSHOLE

Okay, r198, I'll bite. I'm definitely an asshole, but what makes me a racist asshole? Slavery reparations are polling at 22%. Leaving aside whether or not one agrees with them, it should be obvious that embracing it will doom the ticket. As far as having a "diverse" ticket, if you don't the SJW crowd will tear you to shreds. I sure as hell don't think that's fair, but it is what it is. If minority voters stay home, that ALSO dooms the ticket.

"How do any of the rest get the money for their generous promises? By raising budget revenue aka taxes. What other ways are there?"

Well, cutting the cost of the military is one - it amounts to more than half of annual discretionary spending in the US budget. Putting "sunset" rules on any new programmatic expenditures, meaning that if a review of the program finds it hasn't met the objectives for which it was created, axe it. Stop creating entitlements that aren't funded. Make polluters, for example, pay to clean up their messes rather than putting the taxpayers on the hook. Stop supporting inefficient industries with tax breaks. Tax capital gains as income - why should people who make money from money be taxed differently from those who make money by working? (There is no reason at all except that people who have money have more influence than people who work.) Stop funding a police state where local PD's have assault vehicles and weapons given to them by the Feds who had so many they couldn't use them all. Stop allowing hedge funds to "pass through" income to the investors, allowing the fund itself - a business, like any other - to operate free of taxation. Make companies pay their taxes (Amazon, can you hear me?) Make companies with billions in offshore profits bring 'em home in ways the 2017 tax "reforms" did not. Make high-income earners pay Social Security on all their income. Make Medicare premiums higher for high-income retirees. Some of these indeed raise taxes, but on those best able (maybe not willing, but we no longer seem to be able to differentiate the two) to pay them. Shall I go on? There are plenty more.

R200, many of your "plenty more" options are in fact increasing budget revenue by taxation, for instance:

[quote]Stop allowing hedge funds to "pass through" income to the investors, allowing the fund itself - a business, like any other - to operate free of taxation. Make companies pay their taxes (Amazon, can you hear me?) Make companies with billions in offshore profits bring 'em home in ways the 2017 tax "reforms" did not.

Of course, cost-cutting is the other side of the coin and I thought it was fairly obvious. However, it's not the primary or replacement means of achieving the goals Dems want. If it were, the constant Rethug mantra of cost-cutting small government, etc. would've been proven right - which of course is spectacularly not the case.

All I know is, if they give reparations to blacks, I want reparations for being gay—for discrimination against gays. And that discrimination was far more recent than slavery.

And which blacks will get paid? There were blacks who immigrated since Civil War days who have no connection to slavery. Will President Obama get reparations for being half-black? Can he complain that he was held back by discrimination? He was fucking President of the United States for two terms. We probably all deserve reparations for cruelties against our ancient ancestors somewhere along the way. Who hasn’t been hurt by unfairness at some point in their lives. Life isn’t fair. Reparations reward some and cause new unfairness against others.

R201: I said that: "Some of these indeed raise taxes, but on those best able (maybe not willing, but we no longer seem to be able to differentiate the two) to pay them"

R195, what the fuck are you even talking about? I don't like being called a liar by a know-it-all piece of shit who actually knows nothing about what he's talking about.

Yeah and you defend yourself like a raving lunatic.

Which you seem to be. Dial it down, Betty Parris.

Sure, R205. Whatever you say, dear. Embrace your ignorant self.

reparations are not for 'discrimination' they're for people who are descendants of people who never fucking got paid for their work

It's too soon for reparations because everybody interprets it as free money. As someone put it on DL once: we can't have good universal health care in the US because too many white people don't want black people to have free things. So rushing to reparations is a mistake. You need a process of discovery to examine what would be an acceptable way to come to terms with the legacy of slavery and the subsequent decades of systemic racism in the country. People need to fully understand the damage done before a fair kind of redress can be identified. Anybody talking about absolute reparations at this point is being careless and inflammatory. To do this properly requires finesse.

And a lot of people will be offended because Native Americans get nothing, because presumably they “didn’t suffer enough.” European practiced genocide against them and tried to exterminate them. The majority of the population were murdered or starved to death. They made them do the equivalent of the Bataan Death March with all their babies and old people. They took their good land away and left them with worthless land. They’re still poor, with higher numbers of death rates, to this day.

Where’s their reparations? They were here first.

It's no panacea, but the Indians did get casinos. And High-Stakes Bingo.

Not because whites in government did anything to help them. They went into partnership with experienced casino owners because they could allow gambling in their land. It was a legal loophole. Same reason they sell cigarettes and booze in their land. They had to go up against casinos with staffs of lawyers and try to make a fair deal. My guess is they didn’t get one a lot of the time.

Meanwhile, there’s a huge number of Native American women disappearing or being murdered and nobody cares. Some reservations there's no clean water and nobody cares. Some reservations, FAS is really high among infants and nobody cares. People die younger. Schools are terrible. Nobody cares.

Every problem blacks say they have, Native Americans have, but worse. I bet a lot of blacks would rather live anywhere but some of these crummy reservations. Even a slum looks better if you can get running water, heat, and an indoor toilet in the winter.

R207, you mean like women throughout the entire history of humanity?

You cannot pay people for something they did not personally suffer. End of fucking story.

[quote]And which blacks will get paid?

Oprah for sure. Also Jussie Smollett.

R212 doesn't get it. The blindness of white male privilege.

Too bad R214 can't read or he would have realized I was a woman. Like any man on DL would use the historical treatment of women as their counterpoint. And, please, go ahead and name all the instances in all of human history where people were paid for crimes suffered by their five generations removed ancestors. Can you even name any where people were paid for crimes suffered by someone other than themselves? Doubt it.

Who’s this Marianne Williamson woman??

She’s doing a townhall right now. Are they just letting any random person on CNN now?

Would someone please invent Google already so I can look stuff up?!?

We should ask in the Predictions thread when Google will be invented.

Hi, R217

CNN’s got a lineup of Z-list candidates tonight.

Fucking Bernie attacking the "Democratic establishment" again. Fucker. Why did they allow this asshole to run as a Democrat again?

News on the Senate races front: A gay Beto lookalike is running for the Dem Senate nomination in Colorado

Dumbfuck Beto could have been kicking Cornyn's ass all over Texas and winning us a Senate seat but instead he's just going to be an asterisk in Democratic primary history. I notice that the BetoBros have gone underground since Mayor Pete showed up.

When Mayor Pete tries to run for Senate in Indiana, then we'll talk R223.

R224, Beto nearly beat Ted Cruz (who is inexplicably popular in Texas). He could have beaten Cornyn without a problem because even that whackjob isn't crazy enough to be as popular as Ted Cruz in Texas. His Senate run also would have run up Democratic turnout throughout the state, maybe even enough to turn it blue and end the Repugs for a generation. But, ego.

There is no Senate election in Indiana in 2020.

I know there's no Senate election in Indiana, duh. That's why I said "when".

Why doesn't a Castro bro run against Cornyn if he's so easy to beat?

[quote] Dumbfuck Beto could have been kicking Cornyn's ass all over Texas and winning us a Senate seat but instead he's just going to be an asterisk in Democratic primary history. I notice that the BetoBros have gone underground since Mayor Pete showed up.

This is such a disingenuous revision of what happened in Texas. I would expect better of a Pete supporter.

Mayor Pete knows he doesn't stand a chance in a Senate race in IN when the next one rolls in.

That's why he's trying to punch three times above his weight.

Seriously, r225? I'm not a Texan (THANK GOD), but the conventional wisdom everywhere else is that Cruz is the whackjob while Cornyn is the popular senator and would be far, far tougher to beat. Although with Presidential turnout, you never know for sure, especially if some national issue overshadows everything else.

DL: Let's dump on Beto for not staying in his lane.

Also DL: All hail the Mayor for not staying in his lane.

R229 Cruz's approval rating is higher in Texas than Cornyn's. And higher than Trump's (39%). If Beto is the candidate, with increased Presidential year turnout and the fact rednecks would be loath to vote for a Yankee like Trump over a Texan, Beto's coattails could ensure not only Cornyn's replacement but 5 key GOP Congressmen could lose their jobs. The Texas GOP has been panic stricken about the possibility of Beto running and getting the nomination since November. Texas is - due to population and land area - the most expensive market in the country. The GOP would be obliged to pour millions into Texas which they wouldn't normally do.

R229, Cruz has a much higher approval rating in Texas than Cornyn. Cruz is seen as a whackjob by the rest of the country but, like I said, he is inexplicably popular in Texas.

Yep. The Bible thumpers love Cruz. Most Texans don't even know who Cornyn is.

Texas' has the second largest population in the country and the second highest number of Electoral College votes. Trump cannot win if he doesn't carry Texas. If a Democrat carries Texas - game over for the GOP.

But what about before the election? Elections can change people's approval numbers. For example the GOP putz who won the governorship in Florida in a squeaker now has sky-high approval ratings.

I never trust Florida. If Beto's the nominee, he'll carry Texas. Trump is even more unpopular in Texas than Cruz is.

I think Russia gave Florida to the Repugs in 2018. They made sure the Repugs kept the Senate.

....

I think it was on Pod Save America but am not sure. They were discussing a poll that was done a little differently and how it changed the outcomes. Instead of listing the candidates and asking which one you support, they just asked the people to name the person they supported, without any prompting about the names. Biden and Bernie lost a lot of support, going down to something like 17% and 14% while others went up. But, something like 35% didn't have an answer.

Conclusion, Biden's support is name recognition and the ability to remember the name of the former vice president who has been being endlessly named on every news show for months. Even with that, when not handed his name directly, he loses 8 points. Same with Bernie.

This race is wide open.

Beto will not be the nominee. But I don't know how he runs for Senate now, either, because he'd be easy to brand as just determined to run for something. He outsmarted himself.

A few weeks back Stacey Abrams was on msnbc (Morning Joe?) and very pointedly said she had time until the fall to decide if she'll enter the potus race. The host was like, really? She was like, yeah really.

Back then she claimed she hadn't decided if she's gonna go for the GA Senate race or potus. Now she's said no to GA Senate race.

Beto just brought out the most comprehensive Climate Change plan ever - very detailed - everybody's impressed but the BernieBros (natch!). Sen Merkley was among the noted lefties praising it.

Stacey Abrams - if she decides to run for President - will immediately stop being the MSM's darling just as Beto did. And if she thinks brutal social media won't start immediately fat shaming her, she has way too much faith in humankind.

And in other news, Mayor Pete just cut off his nose to spite his face with his bullshit about vaccinations. Yikes. Was he trying to appeal to Goop? Twitter's ripping him to shreds.

Who went to Mayor Pete's meet'n'greet in Houston? Pics are all over social media. Houston's the most diverse city in the whole country and it was nothing but white people - mostly middle-aged/elderly balding men. You just know DLers were there!

I love Mayor Pete, but he isn't breaking through the rancid homophobia of the black community one iota. Although in theory you could still win the Democratic primary without them (assuming Biden implodes), them staying home again gets Trump re-elected.

I see a lot of Hispanics in the background, so it wasn't an all white affair

Latinos are not as homophobic as they used to be. Here’s where some of these countries stand now, from Wikipedia:

Same-sex marriage is currently legal in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Uruguay ,French Guiana, the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, and civil unions are performed in Chile and Ecuador, with a limited form of domestic partnership benefits in Costa Rica. (Update):

On 8 January 2018, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) ruled that the American Convention on Human Rights mandates and requires the legalisation of same-sex marriage. The landmark ruling was fully binding on Costa Rica and set binding precedent in the other signatory countries. The Court recommended that governments issue temporary decrees legalising same-sex marriage until new legislation is brought in. The ruling applies to the countries of Barbados, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Suriname. The Costa Rican Government subsequently announced that it would implement the ruling "in its totality", and the Government of Panama has also signalled that it would accept the ruling.

So a gay marriage may not be a deal breaker for a lot of Latinos, especially young people. It’s turnout that’s the issue, historically it’s very poor.

There’s a lot of anti-Pete lies all over the internet. I was on Instagram today and a guy was posting that unemployment for blacks had gone way up in South Bend (complete lie) and Pete promised more manufacturing. That also seems to be inaccurate, he’s not a lying-to-coal-miners guy, just the opposite. And blacks in Indiana overall have gained a lot more jobs than whites, by percentage. Most new jobs appear to be aimed at retail and white collar office work.

All the posters below his statement were people agreeing with his inaccurate statements. None from South Bend. Most seemed to have no idea whether it was true or not. They were just repeating everything without question.

The guy seemed to have no idea that the Studebaker plant was always meant to be remade into office space for example. Or even that it existed.

It really seems like this isn’t individuals posting, it’s a concerted effort. They’re aggressively trying to change the popular opinion about Pete by misrepresenting. They never offer any facts or detail, they just throw statements out there with no proof at all.

Pete’s Inauguration Day was January 1, 2012. In February 2012, unemployment was 10.00%.

In March 2019 it was 4.0%. How is that “increased unemployment” exactly?