General Democratic 2020 Election Watch

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

KWingJitsu

ยาเม็ดสีแดงหรือสีฟ้ายา?
Nov 15, 2015
10,332
12,701
"Male Voters, find your own candidate."
View: https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1174440356089405442


She'd get steamed rolled by Trump in the age of social media. She polls well in primary theory, maybe not general election reality. This goes back to the Hillary v Trump debate where Trump was flipping independents while Hillary supporters were sure well rehearsed monologues could win the day. Moving from primary to general is a different animal.

Literally she should just show up, don't pander, don't alienate with inherent traits as slights or pejoratives. Win. It isn't hard.

People want to vote against Trump. Don't give them reasons otherwise.
I don't know, man.....Survey says...


Elizabeth Warren surges and Joe Biden fades in close Iowa race, new poll
shows.
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
33,643
68,187
Again, that's not my point. Iowa vs Joe means nothing.

If the Dems walk in and start on their same shit as 2016 - white, male, ambiguous labels as to who is the gilded evil class (might want to define your target so others don't reject you), whatever, as pseudo-pejoratives -- which play well in this echo chamber -- they will alienate the middle independents and suburbs that they need to win. These needed groups aren't into all this shit. Suburban women want a woman president, but not one they are embarrassed culturally to publicly support. My wife and her friends probably would have voted for Hillary if Hillary didn't come to represent a cultural rejection of them, their sons, and their husbands. Independents, the largest voting bloc which flipped the blue wall for Trump, are in areas that like Dem policies and hate Dem identity politics. They hear Warren's policies and support them...then they have to reconcile their interest in policy with a type of language that rejects them and their concerns. Warren isn't getting knocked out with a single bad one liner. It's the trend. Why did Warren need to add, "we aren't here because of men at all!!!!"? What did that benefit? How does that play when gone viral on social media? Do suburban women, one of the most important voter groups this go around, move towards that or away from it?

Keep it up and 2020 becomes 2016 all over again.

Literally just keep pushing the policy, zinger your competition (ie Trump), not the voters you are courting, and let the fact that you are a woman pushing woman-empowering policies be self-evident. You become the first female president. Warren can win. This isn't the way to do it.
 

KWingJitsu

ยาเม็ดสีแดงหรือสีฟ้ายา?
Nov 15, 2015
10,332
12,701
Again, that's not my point. Iowa vs Joe means nothing.

If the Dems walk in and start on their same shit as 2016 - white, male, ambiguous labels as to who is the gilded evil class (might want to define your target so others don't reject you), whatever, as pseudo-pejoratives -- which play well in this echo chamber -- they will alienate the middle independents and suburbs that they need to win. These needed groups aren't into all this shit. Suburban women want a woman president, but not one they are embarrassed culturally to publicly support. My wife and her friends probably would have voted for Hillary if Hillary didn't come to represent a cultural rejection of them, their sons, and their husbands. Independents, the largest voting bloc which flipped the blue wall for Trump, are in areas that like Dem policies and hate Dem identity politics. They hear Warren's policies and support them...then they have to reconcile their interest in policy with a type of language that rejects them and their concerns. Warren isn't getting knocked out with a single bad one liner. It's the trend. Why did Warren need to add, "we aren't here because of men at all!!!!"? What did that benefit? How does that play when gone viral on social media? Do suburban women, one of the most important voter groups this go around, move towards that or away from it?

Keep it up and 2020 becomes 2016 all over again.

Literally just keep pushing the policy, zinger your competition (ie Trump), not the voters you are courting, and let the fact that you are a woman pushing woman-empowering policies be self-evident. You become the first female president. Warren can win. This isn't the way to do it.
All that is well and good but I'm pretty sure none of what she said is half as incendiary as the current occupant of the white house who made a name for himself with way more pejoratives and shenanigans.

What she said is mild (if not accurate), by comparison. Lets not ever forget that part of Trump's success is due to Russian interference combined with an antiquated electoral college system that favors republicans in close races. I'd worry if she starts calling white men rapists who are bringing drugs and crime. Till then, ... meh.
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
33,643
68,187
with an antiquated electoral college system that favors republicans in close races
Luckily that's different this time around...

I'd worry if she starts calling white men rapists who are bringing drugs and crime. Till then, ... meh.
Mexicans don't vote for the presidency.

All that is well and good but I'm pretty sure none of what she said is half as incendiary as the current occupant of the white house who made a name for himself with way more pejoratives and shenanigans.
Yes, set the bar for campaign strategy at the highest unlikeability president in history... and turn an easy win into a close race for no good reason.
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
33,643
68,187
Bernie Sanders Proposes a Wealth Tax, Taking Aim at Billionaires

“Let me be very clear: As president of the United States, I will reduce the outrageous and grotesque and immoral level of income and wealth inequality,” Mr. Sanders said in an interview. “What we are trying to do is demand and implement a policy which significantly reduces income and wealth inequality in America by telling the wealthiest families in this country they cannot have so much wealth.”
Asked if he thought billionaires should exist in the United States, Mr. Sanders said, “I hope the day comes when they don’t.” He added, “It’s not going to be tomorrow.”
“I don’t think that billionaires should exist,” he said, adding that there would always be rich people and others with less money. “This proposal does not eliminate billionaires, but it eliminates a lot of the wealth that billionaires have, and I think that’s exactly what we should be doing.”
Bernie Sanders’s wealth tax proposal
  • $32 million to $50 million net worth: 1 percent marginal tax rate

  • $50 million to $250 million: 2 percent

  • $250 million to $500 million: 3 percent

  • $500 million to $1 billion: 4 percent

  • $1 billion to $2.5 billion: 5 percent

  • $2.5 billion to $5 billion: 6 percent

  • $5 billion to $10 billion: 7 percent

  • Over $10 billion: 8 percent
Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax proposal
  • $50 million to $1 billion: 2 percent

  • Over $1 billion: 3 percent
Arguments of fair share, incentives to spend and invest rather than hold, etc are much more palatable to me and everyone I know. I support the economic numbers and moves that come with reducing wealth inequality.

A goal of, "you are not allowed to have X" dollars seems less palatable and beyond that an easy political target that will get hammered in the public arena.

That is to say nothing of the fundamental view differences on an arbitrary amount of money suddenly being immoral. Only that the politics of it are easily attacked and maybe not that winning of a plan for independents.
 

Daglord

Posting Machine
Jan 26, 2015
1,235
1,734
Tulsi Gabbard qualifies for October Democratic debate


Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has qualified for the October Democratic presidential primary debate, making her the twelfth candidate to hit the Democratic National Committee's thresholds.

Gabbard got 2 percent support in a New Hampshire poll conducted by Monmouth University and released on Tuesday. The Hawaii congresswoman had previously gotten 2 percent in three other DNC-approved polls, and her campaign said she already racked up more than the 130,000 donors she needed to make the debate stage.

Gabbard will join Joe Biden, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Julian Castro, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Beto O'Rourke, Tom Steyer, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Andrew Yang onstage in October.
 

Daglord

Posting Machine
Jan 26, 2015
1,235
1,734
Tulsi Gabbard calls for foreign policy-focused debate


Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), a 2020 Democratic White House hopeful, is calling for a debate centered exclusively on foreign policy, saying the current format doesn’t do voters justice.

“It would be very valuable for voters to have a foreign policy focused debate, period,” Gabbard told Hill.TV during an interview that aired on Thursday.

Gabbard, who served in Iraq as a member of the National Guard, said voters, including those in the military, “deserve more than just having one or two foreign policy-related questions in a two-hour long debate,” adding that not nearly time enough time is allotted to the complex issue.
 

kneeblock

Read Achille Mbembe
Apr 18, 2015
9,949
18,524
Again, that's not my point. Iowa vs Joe means nothing.

If the Dems walk in and start on their same shit as 2016 - white, male, ambiguous labels as to who is the gilded evil class (might want to define your target so others don't reject you), whatever, as pseudo-pejoratives -- which play well in this echo chamber -- they will alienate the middle independents and suburbs that they need to win. These needed groups aren't into all this shit. Suburban women want a woman president, but not one they are embarrassed culturally to publicly support. My wife and her friends probably would have voted for Hillary if Hillary didn't come to represent a cultural rejection of them, their sons, and their husbands. Independents, the largest voting bloc which flipped the blue wall for Trump, are in areas that like Dem policies and hate Dem identity politics. They hear Warren's policies and support them...then they have to reconcile their interest in policy with a type of language that rejects them and their concerns. Warren isn't getting knocked out with a single bad one liner. It's the trend. Why did Warren need to add, "we aren't here because of men at all!!!!"? What did that benefit? How does that play when gone viral on social media? Do suburban women, one of the most important voter groups this go around, move towards that or away from it?

Keep it up and 2020 becomes 2016 all over again.

Literally just keep pushing the policy, zinger your competition (ie Trump), not the voters you are courting, and let the fact that you are a woman pushing woman-empowering policies be self-evident. You become the first female president. Warren can win. This isn't the way to do it.
Doc, with all due respect, you, your wife and probably most of the people you know aren't the middle class suburban voters in the demos the Dems need to move to win this election. Remember, the median household income is 60k and support for issues like equal pay and opportunity and rhetoric around not being dismissed are what mobilized much of the women's vote Hillary did get. Add in deeper alienation from Trump among women voters since 2016 and you get some folks leaning right staying home and others in the middle actually pushing the lever the other way.

The swing states of this election have some demographic differences from past cycles and also have ensconced themselves in different ways of making politics and interpreting messages than prior times. I think what you're saying about more specificity, focus on policies, and a retreat from what's sometimes referred to as identity politics is a good long form strategy for continuing to build a Democratic Congressional majority and even for flipping some consistently red states closer to purple at least, but I fear this isn't that election. Due in part to Trump's volatility and in part to the economy being in a wait and see mode, with indicators of downturn to come, everything is risky. Passing on the already mobilized identarian coalitions in favor of hard policy wonkism could backfire due to exogenous factors and could give away 2024 even if 2020 works out.

Bottom line, every candidate is trying to mollify multiple constituencies and Dems have more to gain with rhetoric keyed to underpaid mothers in Grand Rapids, Michigan than upper class folks in Texas. That said, beyond the rhetoric, most of the policy planks speak for themselves and are keyed to whether you support a moderately regulated somewhat redistributive theory of state or the alternative we're in now that mostly favors market-based solutionism and deregulation. Also, I guess it depends on whether saying something like women don't need men seems more hostile than literally everything this President says on a daily basis.

I agree with you also that telling people there might need to be a ceiling on their earnings can play poorly because of the whole "temporarily disadvantaged millionaires" syndrome in the US, but the question is whether Americans are more envious (of those they perceive deprive them of wealth) than they are faithful (that they too can be wealthy someday). Since 2016, it seems like the politics of envy has gradually subsumed faith leaving us is a dismal state of realpolitik.
 
Last edited: