2020 Presidential Election

[Alatar]

Not to be smart, but you guys need to pick whoever has the best chance of beating Trump and that means catering to a chunk of the middle. From here, that looks like Biden.

[Cerin]

I think that kind of thinking is futile, Alatar, because trying to guess who has the best chance of beating Trump is just that -- guessing -- and it only ends in a nominee a majority feel lukewarm about. John Kerry comes to mind. IMO, people should vote in the primary for whomever they feel most inspired by and think would make the best President. In the end, someone will get the nomination, and everyone anti-Trump will rally around that person.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I agree, Cerin.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[yovargas]

Aw man. I was really hoping Biden wouldn't run, unlikely as that seemed (he's finally announced). There's already so many damm people running and I would prefer there be more space for the newer, fresher faces that have been rising up. Not that I know anything about anything but I think many of them could generate a lot more excitement than Biden can. (And some of those new faces should be able to appeal to the middle too.)

[Dave_LF]

Personally, I'd love to see politics become less exciting

[Alatar]

This is why I think Trump will win. Democrats aren’t pragmatic enough. They’re looking for an amazing leader who inspires them. Anyone who inspires the Democrats is gonna fire up the Republican base. You need someone who is good enough to lead without firing up the Republicans. IMHO

[yovargas]

See: Obama.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Obama, Bill Clinton, and Carter were each nominated over safe, establishment candidates and they each won. Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and Hillary Clinton were the safe establishment candidates and they each lost.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[River]

Trump already fires up the Republican base so that's a pointless concern. Let's just set "fired up Republican base" as a constant and go from there.

[Frelga]

Trump already fires up the Republican base so that's a pointless concern. Let's just set "fired up Republican base" as a constant and go from there.

This.

[yovargas]

Obama, Bill Clinton, and Carter were each nominated over safe, establishment candidates and they each won. Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and Hillary Clinton were the safe establishment candidates and they each lost.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

And, let's not forget, that Trump himself beat all the safe establishment Republicans in his primaries.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

And, let's not forget, that Trump himself beat all the safe establishment Republicans in his primaries.

Not to mention the boiled turnip.

[Frelga]

It is now evident that the Democratic strategy of "let's not upset the Conservatives" backfired horribly while the Republican strategy of "f---- the libs" worked great for them.

[yovargas]

That poor, poor turnip....

[Alatar]

Well, hopefully I'm wrong.

[Dave_LF]

I don't know; I've basically accepted that I can no longer predict what voters want, so when the time comes, I'm going to ignore "electability" and vote for what I want. And from where I'm standing right now, "not obviously evil or insane" is a fairly ringing endorsement, but it's followed closely by "not any kind of ideologue."

[River]

I'm still leaning towards some sort of Warren/Buttigieg combo. Don't care who's on top of the ticket so long as both are on it. Though I expect that both are too nerdy to be nominated. Which is sad because having a POTUS or VPOTUS who can speak the languages of allies and foes would be a refreshing twist.

[Frelga]

Well, hopefully I'm wrong.

You might well be right that Trump will win. Especially if people continue treating this election as free and fair, and democracy as a self-perpetuating system.

NPR

Six months after electing a diverse wave of women to Congress, some "electability"-minded Democrats fear the U.S. isn't ready for a woman, person of color or LGBTQ presidential candidate.

Electability minded might be the best euphemism yet, combining racist and sexist. It's like people forgot that the Democrats last great success was Obama.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

On the other hand, the Democrats last great failure was Hillary Clinton, who for all the baggage she brought would have certainly won that election but for the sexist nature of a significant portion of the electorate that would have voted for a candidate with the exact same qualities that she had, if she was a man. I'm not at all saying that I think that the Democrats should nominate a white, straight, Christian male; I don't think that (although I wouldn't hesitate to support a white, straight, Christian male if I thought he was the best person overall for the job). But it would be naïve to pretend that prejudicial attitudes do not come into play. Obama won twice despite the fact that there were some people that were never going to vote for him simply because he had dark skin and a funny sounding name.

[Frelga]

You are not wrong, V. However, Hilary carried the additional burden of being lackluster to the progressives who did not turn out for her. That is, if we are assuming that the last election was free and fair, which is not a given.