Depends on what dirt they dig up
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
- Thread starter RustyNails
- Start date
- Status
Depends on what dirt they dig up
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Difficult to say, because we don't have a confirmed pool of candidates or even that much of an idea this far in advance. I think it'll be a very open field, and I think that past contenders (Clinton, Sanders, Kaine, Biden, O'Malley) probably won't run again. Taking out obvious novelty options like Michelle or Zuckerberg, you see various pieces on the following pool of candidates (in no particular order):
Elizabeth Warren
Julian Castro
Amy Klobuchar
Cory Booker
Tulsi Gabbard
Tammy Duckworth
Kamala Harris
Catherine Cortez Masto
Kirsten Gillibrand
There's some absences there, like Hickenlooper and Franken, but there's not really been any noise coming from them, and the serious candidates will be looking to gentle send out puff pieces and whatnot now, well ahead of time. Hickenlooper even explicitly said he wouldn't run in 2020 (although to be fair, you always need to take these things with a pinch of salt).
In terms of who is likely to win, I think the two relatively clear leaders are Duckworth and Klobuchar. Warren closely trails them, but the first two can sell you a folksy Democratic Party (we care for you because we're like you) whereas Warren is a paternalist one (we care for you even though we're not like you). Cortez Masto and Harris then follow up Warren - I think Warren has been around enough to have bought 'credibility' in terms of sticking up for the little guy. Cortez Masto and Harris would have to sell it over the course of the campaign, which is doable but harder.
At the other end, Gabbard is a non-starter. Booker is like the Democratic Rubio, painfully insincere and unlikely to convince Obama -> Trump voters he cares about them. Castro is slightly better than Booker in this respect, but suffers from the same problem. Gillibrand is better than the previous two, but still the same problem - her policy stances are incredibly insincere, and I don't think people are or will be in the mood for that. They'll want principled populists, preacher men with a bit of fire, not bureaucrats.
So, something like:
1. Duckworth
2. Klobuchar
3. Warren
4/5. Harris/Cortez Masto (very difficult to separate)
===end of good candidates===
6. Gillibrand
7. Castro
8. Booker
9. Gabbard
In terms of candidates I like the policy slate of, well, that's difficult to say at this stage!
BoogieWoogie
Banned
"Gillary"
balladofwindfishes
Member
I don't think Warren will run. I never really got the vibe from her that she wants to be president, I think she's content in the Senate, and all speculation of her running for president is just people wanting her to be president because she's a good person and her kind of going along with it. She'd also probably lose, and I can't imagine she doesn't know that.
shinra-bansho
Member
Lololol. Julian Castro. Do you just hate blonde women.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
I think I'll need to deplug from being constantly in the know on shit with politics and Trump as my brain just can't take much more. I'll still contribute as much as I can but Christ, all this is really taking its toll on me.
modernlifeisANDY
Member
So apparently Spicey is not doing the press briefing today:
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Too hungover from partying in a rabbit suit all last night.
Got the Shakes
Member
Unemployment dropped to 4.4% which is the lowest in a decade and 211,000 jobs were added in April. I expect Trump to proclaim himself the greatest job creator in the history of Earth.
cartoon_soldier
Member
Improving economy and hourly wages will be biggest reason Trump will have a good chance of getting re-elected
TestOfTide
Banned
I love Warren, but she would be a idea, because excluding Hillary and Obama, Warren is the one Democrat that the GOP has been attacking for years and is ready to target.
She'll be fine. The GOP hasn't shown any clairvoyance with regards to Gillibrand. Like, they were able to hone in on Hillary by starting their attacks on her as early as December 2012.
neurosisxeno
Member
Obviously Sanders is going to run again in 2020, here's a pic of him from the future:
smokeymicpot
Beat EviLore at pool.
I read this yesterday and I couldn't believe it. He is part of the navy reserve and this is his weekend of duty.
Also this is funny.
I have formally requested from the WH and the Intel Committees info on whether I was surveilled by Obama admin and or the Intel community!
https://twitter.com/randpaul/status/860482401109258242
balladofwindfishes
Member
The economy isn't going to continue to grow for 3.7 more years.
neurosisxeno
Member
Especially not if the GOP has their way.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I like Gillebrand a lot (and Franken, if he wants to run) and I'd be totally down for Duckworth. She's awesome and hey, running an Illinois Senator worked last time
EDIT: Man thinking of any of them running actually makes me excited, I don't think that's true for any other names on the list
EDIT: Man thinking of any of them running actually makes me excited, I don't think that's true for any other names on the list
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I'm still worried that the political climate is so toxic right now that running a woman as the candidate would just incite the same rabid sexism that appeared when Hillary ran, and we'd see the same result.
It sickens me that we even have to talk about this in 2017 America, but it's where we are at in society, sadly.
It sickens me that we even have to talk about this in 2017 America, but it's where we are at in society, sadly.
You know, this might be just be my experience, but I've noticed that even many ardent Trump supporters are not happy with the vote on health care yesterday.
Maybe this will be the first step in his supporters finally turning their backs on him?
Should be interesting, as Trump took credit for the positive numbers for the first quarter, which he obviously had zero to do with. So I wonder if he'll take credit for the bad numbers of the second quarter, or magically make it Obama's fault somehow?
Maybe this will be the first step in his supporters finally turning their backs on him?
Retail/jobs report for this 2nd quarter are going to be bad.
Should be interesting, as Trump took credit for the positive numbers for the first quarter, which he obviously had zero to do with. So I wonder if he'll take credit for the bad numbers of the second quarter, or magically make it Obama's fault somehow?
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I'm not expecting them to turn on Trump but pleeeeeeeeease let this be the thing that sinks Ryan
Veritigo_X
Member
Wtf Crab you didn't even list Sherrod Brown. Garbage list.
shinra-bansho
Member
More power to her if she makes it through the crowded field. But I think you're kidding yourself if you think an Asian, female, disabled candidate isn't going to run into a shit ton of discrimination in both the primary and the general. Veteran or not.
And all the female candidates of which the Democratic Party has more potential contenders will face said sexism.
This doesn't mean they shouldn't run. They definitely should. But it's still something that should be confronted head on, not ignored.
And all the female candidates of which the Democratic Party has more potential contenders will face said sexism.
This doesn't mean they shouldn't run. They definitely should. But it's still something that should be confronted head on, not ignored.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
That is not how this works.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think he's interested. Where there's fire, there's smoke, and I'm not reading enough puff pieces about Sherrod with quotes from unnamed DC sources. I think if he did run, he'd be the most likely to win of all.
The problem with Kamala running is that there isn't anyone who enjoys working with Kamala and her campaign will be a Hillary 08 disaster ¯_(ツ_/¯
I hadn't heard this and would be interested in reading about it, mainly because Kamala is the one I'm pulling for the most in 2020. :lol In any event, Trump's campaign was a constant trainwreck in motion that did not have the support of nearly the entire GOP for well over a year and he's now the president so maybe not that much of a dealbreaker?
I hope a better candidate than Kamala emerges -- I think she's a good prospect but if there's someone better in the wings, I want the best possible candidate out there -- but a major reason why she will gain more traction than others is because she's attractive! We've never had a woman president and there's a strong sexist barrier in this country in all things, but particularly politics, and I think the only way a woman -- or at least, the first woman -- is going to break that barrier in a presidential race is if she's good looking. Most voters aren't going to say "I'd never vote for an old lady," but there will be something about an older woman candidate -- their voice, their looks, their fucking clothes -- that will always be cited as a reason why there's something about them they just don't like. It's for that reason (among many others) that I think people pushing women like Warren or Patty Murray need to get real.
I like Gillibrand too and she's my current #2 choice. And, like Kamala, I think she meets the attractive threshold for our millions of subconsciously sexist voters.
balladofwindfishes
Member
It was like there was suddenly a cloud over DC yesterday that caused everyone to collectively lose their minds.
I imagine there's A LOT of regret today from what happened yesterday.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Right. My main concern stems from the fact that I don't democrats as a whole will handle it properly.
Men whose job it is to read―didn't. The attack ads write themselves.
Veritigo_X
Member
He can't really show too much interest now since he has an election next year to worry about first. I feel like I have been seeing those Politico puff pieces about him lately, but I'm probably biased since I'm a huge stan so I pay attention to those kinds of things. Anecdotally, I have been noticing a lot more people gushing over him here in NY which is weird for an Ohio senator.
balladofwindfishes
Member
This thread is surprisingly... calm after what happened yesterday.
I don't even think they need to focus on that. Just straight up say the person voted to defund healthcare in NYS. Let them defend themselves by saying they didn't read the bill.
I don't even think they need to focus on that. Just straight up say the person voted to defund healthcare in NYS. Let them defend themselves by saying they didn't read the bill.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Sorry, is this responding to me?
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
I don't think sexism was directly responsible for as many non-Hillary votes as it was responsible for the public persona and political instincts she crafted for herself that made her so at odds with what some in the electorate wanted. Warren is only a little younger, but her political career started much later and she is not nearly as guarded and measured, her problem laying more in her perceived Northeast Liberal Condescension. Younger women running for POTUS did not have to forge their political identities in genteel Arkansas, and they'll benefit from that in terms of their ability to connect with voters.
Re: Duckworth, however, I haven't seen a lot of evidence that she has the persona or speaking ability to really excite people about her. Speech at the DNC last year was kinda stiff.
shinra-bansho
Member
It is a general comment to a variety of people thinking Duckworth is a top contender.
And actually just a general comment considering all the top contenders are women really.
For example comment above. No, sexism was very much a factor in this campaign too. Yes, Clinton had accumulated decades of misogynistic hate. But sexism is still pervasive well outside of personal Clinton derangement.
And actually just a general comment considering all the top contenders are women really.
For example comment above. No, sexism was very much a factor in this campaign too. Yes, Clinton had accumulated decades of misogynistic hate. But sexism is still pervasive well outside of personal Clinton derangement.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Right, but frankly, all the best Democratic prospects are women at the moment, even accounting for the sexism they'll face. It's not like there's some slightly less talented male equivalent who would perform marginally better in a GE due to lack of sexism, it's a competent woman or... Booker?
And while I do think Clinton suffered from sexism, I think this thread can overplay it an attempt to hide how bad a candidate she was. A male Hillary Clinton would probably still have lost - al Gore being a relatively good analogy.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
If Oprah is the Dem nominee, I become a Jill Stein Stan.
Reading this WaPo opinion piece legit brought tears to my eyes as I thought about the real impact of the healthcare bill if it somehow passed the Senate in its current form.
Every Republican who voted for this abomination must be held accountable
Every Republican who voted for this abomination must be held accountable
balladofwindfishes
Member
My thoughts about this entire thing, after reading about Trump only really wanting a win and not caring, is that
- The Senate guts the entire thing and passes a hollow bill that does nothing but lower medical taxes or something and champions it as making substantial improvements to the ACA
- It sits in the senate for a month or two and quietly gets put on hold because Trump got the win he wanted, and nobody has to own up to destroying the entire health care system of our country
Poodlestrike
Banned
See the thing is, the reason why her political habits and tendencies were so damaging was because they played into her existing demonization which was largely founded on and due to sexism. So I'm not sure you can separate the two.
As for Duckworth, being a wounded vet gives her an enormous shield from identity attacks, and an automatic bye on defense issues, but you're right that she's not a particularly great speaker, and I'm not sure she's got the charisma to make the connection she needs to. I prefer Harris and Gillibrand at this point, but Brown and Franken would both be amazing. Harris' big downside in my eyes is that she's from California which we already have an iron grip on anyway. Gillibrand's upstate NY cred gives her an easier in with rural voters, as does Brown and Franken's midwesterner status.
We'll see somehow I don't imagine Cruz, Rand, Meadows and that ilk will let us forget.
To be quite honest, I'm more angry than anything these days. My political baseline is just silent rage
And that's certainly a sticky position to be in, yeah.
shinra-bansho
Member
There was a lot about Clinton the candidate that was bad because of her innate personality.
There's a lot of her personality that's been shaped by how sexist society is.
And there was a lot about the outcome that was due to how sexist society still is in itself. For one (big) thing, how the media covers female politicians and leaders.
And pretending society isn't still incredibly sexist simply because shrilliary was particularly hated is folly.
There's a lot of her personality that's been shaped by how sexist society is.
And there was a lot about the outcome that was due to how sexist society still is in itself. For one (big) thing, how the media covers female politicians and leaders.
And pretending society isn't still incredibly sexist simply because shrilliary was particularly hated is folly.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Trump appears to be satisfied with the results of yesterday, and will likely get bored of the month or more long process of working the bill through the senate.
Without the White House breathing down their backs, I'm not really sure the bill goes anywhere. It only passed yesterday because Trump threatened to force Ryan to resign and bullied a bunch of idiots. If he has no more interest in it, it doesn't really go anywhere.
Cruz and Rand are ignored by the senate anyway, so nothing would be new there. They say stupid stuff all the time.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
All of those things are true. Nevertheless, as you can see, I think most of the best Democratic contenders are women. Do you disagree?
RustyNails
Member
Duckworth will make a fine President but I still think Sherrod Brown or Al Franken have the best shot.
IggyChooChoo
Member
How does the reconciliation window fit into all this? That deadline seems a lot more flexible than I thought it was back in March. How much time does the Senate have to work on this? Can they extend it at will?
I like the idea of Brown but the only time I've seen him speak was at the DNC last summer and he didn't sound that great. Not sure if he is a normally charismatic guy and was just having an off day, but as a potential 2020 pick (or what I thought at the time was a 2024 pick) I wasn't sold.
Franken is an interesting choice, I don't know how he would play nationally. But I also worry that Franken and Brown are the 2017 equivalent of John Edwards: the "let's chase the white, rural working-class demographic with one of their own because what else can we do to win" candidate. I don't know that that me-tooism ever plays well, at least for Dems (e.g. John Kerry being our military answer to Bush's wartime commander-in-chief image).
Franken is an interesting choice, I don't know how he would play nationally. But I also worry that Franken and Brown are the 2017 equivalent of John Edwards: the "let's chase the white, rural working-class demographic with one of their own because what else can we do to win" candidate. I don't know that that me-tooism ever plays well, at least for Dems (e.g. John Kerry being our military answer to Bush's wartime commander-in-chief image).
shinra-bansho
Member
I think they are.
I think Duckworth will have to contend with also being Asian and disabled. (Ask John Kerry if their military heroism means anything).
I think Warren will have to contend with also being old.
I think Harris will probably have to contend with never having biological children.
And Gillibrand will probably have to contend with being a blonde white woman from NY after a blonde white woman from NY lost. (Despite generic white men losing all the time.)
I don't think Cortez Masto is even in the running. And she'll have no money base as the Jr Senator from Nevada.
I think Duckworth will have to contend with also being Asian and disabled. (Ask John Kerry if their military heroism means anything).
I think Warren will have to contend with also being old.
I think Harris will probably have to contend with never having biological children.
And Gillibrand will probably have to contend with being a blonde white woman from NY after a blonde white woman from NY lost. (Despite generic white men losing all the time.)
I don't think Cortez Masto is even in the running. And she'll have no money base as the Jr Senator from Nevada.
- Status