Democrats 2020

[southernhybrid]

...
Why is it that the far left's "path to party unity" always requires the moderates to compromise and take it up the tail pipe but no compromise from the far left? Every time there is a major vote, more moderates win than the far left. Biden right now has 1.5 million more votes than BS. When is the left going to start saying that maybe to unite the party and defeat Trump, that we all need to compromise.

There is a tendency among moderates to become complacent about the loyalty of various constituencies, for example the youth vote. The nominating process is now coming down to who Joe Biden will choose as a running mate. That is why, to the delight of the Republicans, Joe Biden fell for a reporter's gotcha question about whether he would be willing to have a Republican as a running mate. It delighted them, not because anyone really believed he would do it, but because that was a sure way to split off a huge chunk of disaffected young progressive voters, many of whom are already claiming they may not vote for Biden. It is not enough to get Bernie Sanders' endorsement.

Biden needs to pick a running mate who will appeal to the left of his own core constituency. He is probably more inclined to choose someone like Amy Klobuchar, who is more compatible with his way of thinking but won't attract any new voters. Moderates are already in his pocket. Progressives, who showed up enthusiastically to vote for Sanders or Warren, will be dragging their feet to the polls in November. It will come down to just getting rid of Donald Trump, and not much more. That is familiar turf to Donald Trump, and will give him the best hope of getting reelected.

Sanders has said that he would not run on the same ticket as Biden, and that would be a really stupid tactic for the party, if he did. Biden doesn't have many good alternatives other than Elizabeth Warren. My guess is that he will pick either Klobuchar or Harris, because Warren might push away more centrist independents and Republicans who would like to get rid of Trump but fear the kinds of changes that Warren and Sanders have been advocating. Whoever Biden chooses, there is a good chance that that person will end up in the presidency. I'm not confident that Biden is fit enough to survive a term as president.

I think that Biden needs to pick a VP who is younger and visionary. I really like Amy. But think that Stacey Abrams would be the bomb. She's very bright. I don't think that the far left warriors can get too bent out of shape by Abrams. While I don't think that Biden needs help nailing down the black vote; SA will unite the democratic party as much as is possible.

I agree with you about Stacy. Imo, she has enough leadership experience to do the job, plus she also has the qualities of a natural born leader. In addition to her leadership position in the Georgia Congress, she's started up an organization to help diminish voter suppression. She's a pragmatic progressive. She was robbed of our governorship as evidenced by the numerous attempts to suppress the vote of the young, and the poor, especially poor minorities. Even at that, she lost by only a tiny margin. I've never known a politician who had her natural skills, ability to compromise in a pragmatic way, as well as being quite charismatic. She also gives excellent speeches.

I attended a local rally here when she ran for governor. The crowd was diverse in age, gender and race, and I live in a black majority town. She energized the crowd. She is an extremely dedicated person and I think she is ready to be VP, and then be mentored to make a presidential run in 2024. If not, I hope she will run again for Georgia governor. She doesn't belong in the Senate. She belongs in a leadership position.

I've also noticed that some of my younger more progressive friends. have mentioned that they would fully support a Biden/Abrams ticket. If not her, I'm not sure who would be best for Biden's running mate. I think it's likely that Biden has a few good years left in him. His speech the other day was excellent.

 

[Politesse]

And you can continue to wag your finger and "tsk" about it, or you can face reality. Young voters lean liberal, but they don't trust the Democratic Party to advocate for them, partly because it's head honchos constantly mock them publically and scorn the idea that youth votes are even important to try for... until they are. We're smart enough to see that giving the DNC a blank check always, always results in either non-action or backwards movement, and that genuinely liberal projects are only pursued when and if the Party is facing considerable pressure, election-losing pressure, from Progressive critics.

If 100% true, why did younger voters vote in greater numbers for a moderate, Obama, rather than Sanders? The younger voter turnout is smaller for Sanders than it was under Obama.

Because he didn't market himself as a middle-of-the-road, status quo worshiping centrist when he was on the campaign trail. He was that, but that was not the basis of his campaign. And I think his ultimate betrayal of Progressive causes did hurt voter turnout in this election, and is a major problem for Biden, whose association with Obama is one of the definable qualities most Americans know about him.

I do agree that Abrams would be a sensible VP pick for Biden.

 

[Rhea]

This statement mystifies me.
They said it in 2016, too. ""The establishment took us for granted!"


Are they kidding me, here? I'm not even a moderate, I'm a progressive. But are they kidding me, here?


You know what?
YES, I was complacent about thinking these progressives wanted some progress more than they wanted regressive.
YES, I was complacent in thinking these people could do math.
YES, I was complacent about thinking these progressives knew the difference between the party of liberal judges and the party of fascist judges.
YES, I was complacent in thinking these people knew the difference between a Democracy and a Theocracy



Yes, I took for granted that you would vote in your self interest instead of against it.
Yes, I took for granted that you were at least as smart as the people who lived in non-swing states to know that a personal visit didn't matter, what mattered were the policies.



Hoooo-boy, was I ever wrong. You shore showed me.



I took for granted that this was a desireable outcome.
And now after seeing him in action, you're saying they are ready to make the same choice again.

And you can continue to wag your finger and "tsk" about it,

I'm not wagging my finger and tsking. You misunderstand my tone.
They can make any choice they want.
I assumed they would vote in their self interest.
But they didn't. Or they say they didn't.
Or they claim they won't.

Whatever it is, they claim they want a thing, and they vote in a way that gives them something opposite.
I don't tsk that. I wonder if they ever really wanted it or if there's something that keeps them from seeing it. Like pride, or arrogance.

or you can face reality. Young voters lean liberal, but they don't trust the Democratic Party to advocate for them,

So they go with the GOP.
Yeah, that really leans soooo liberal.

partly because it's head honchos constantly mock them publically

They say this... but, citation please?

and scorn the idea that youth votes are even important to try for... until they are.

Oh, you may be talking about scorning the idea that trying for them, like Bernie did, made no difference in them showing up at polls? So, the old, "you said if we tried for you, that you'd show up - but you left Bernie out to dry"? Like that?

I know I sound scorning - the sarcasm side of me - but really what I feel is, "okay, I think I better understand what you are saying/promising now. I thought you were one thing, but you were a different thing." I really thought they were progressives ready to work for change. I was mistaken. But I've got it now, I think. They will come out for progressive causes, but only certain ones, and only if the like the person saying it, and they might not even show up for him. But dammit, they deserve some respect!

 

[Politesse]

I'm not wagging my finger and tsking. You misunderstand my tone.
They can make any choice they want.
I assumed they would vote in their self interest.
But they didn't. Or they say they didn't.
Or they claim they won't.

Whatever it is, they claim they want a thing, and they vote in a way that gives them something opposite.
I don't tsk that. I wonder if they ever really wanted it or if there's something that keeps them from seeing it. Like pride, or arrogance.

or you can face reality. Young voters lean liberal, but they don't trust the Democratic Party to advocate for them,

So they go with the GOP.
Yeah, that really leans soooo liberal.

partly because it's head honchos constantly mock them publically

They say this... but, citation please?

and scorn the idea that youth votes are even important to try for... until they are.

Oh, you may be talking about scorning the idea that trying for them, like Bernie did, made no difference in them showing up at polls? So, the old, "you said if we tried for you, that you'd show up - but you left Bernie out to dry"? Like that?

I know I sound scorning - the sarcasm side of me - but really what I feel is, "okay, I think I better understand what you are saying/promising now. I thought you were one thing, but you were a different thing." I really thought they were progressives ready to work for change. I was mistaken. But I've got it now, I think. They will come out for progressive causes, but only certain ones, and only if the like the person saying it, and they might not even show up for him. But dammit, they deserve some respect!

Deserve?? Facts are facts whether you feel entitled about them or not. The DNC can either court young votes or dismiss them, there will be an obvious outcome either way. It's just politics.

 

[skepticalbip]

...........
I'm not sure who would be best for Biden's running mate.
.........

Hillary?

 

[lpetrich]

Tulsi Gabbard slams DNC for failure to recognize her in 2020 race - YouTube - she appeared on Fox News about this.

Her candidacy is about ending US involvement in its numerous wars in distant lands, she tells us. She claims that Trump also promised that, but he obviously didn't deliver. She also neglected the various other issues that her fellow Democrats have addressed, like healthcare and climate change.

I've seen some speculation that she might be aiming for a career as a Fox News Democrat, a Democrat who likes to bash other Democrats.

She may also be aiming at becoming a Fox News token brunette.

 

[Copernicus]

...
Why is it that the far left's "path to party unity" always requires the moderates to compromise and take it up the tail pipe but no compromise from the far left? Every time there is a major vote, more moderates win than the far left. Biden right now has 1.5 million more votes than BS. When is the left going to start saying that maybe to unite the party and defeat Trump, that we all need to compromise.

There is a tendency among moderates to become complacent about the loyalty of various constituencies, for example the youth vote. The nominating process is now coming down to who Joe Biden will choose as a running mate. That is why, to the delight of the Republicans, Joe Biden fell for a reporter's gotcha question about whether he would be willing to have a Republican as a running mate. It delighted them, not because anyone really believed he would do it, but because that was a sure way to split off a huge chunk of disaffected young progressive voters, many of whom are already claiming they may not vote for Biden. It is not enough to get Bernie Sanders' endorsement.

Biden needs to pick a running mate who will appeal to the left of his own core constituency. He is probably more inclined to choose someone like Amy Klobuchar, who is more compatible with his way of thinking but won't attract any new voters. Moderates are already in his pocket. Progressives, who showed up enthusiastically to vote for Sanders or Warren, will be dragging their feet to the polls in November. It will come down to just getting rid of Donald Trump, and not much more. That is familiar turf to Donald Trump, and will give him the best hope of getting reelected.

Sanders has said that he would not run on the same ticket as Biden, and that would be a really stupid tactic for the party, if he did. Biden doesn't have many good alternatives other than Elizabeth Warren. My guess is that he will pick either Klobuchar or Harris, because Warren might push away more centrist independents and Republicans who would like to get rid of Trump but fear the kinds of changes that Warren and Sanders have been advocating. Whoever Biden chooses, there is a good chance that that person will end up in the presidency. I'm not confident that Biden is fit enough to survive a term as president.

I think that Biden needs to pick a VP who is younger and visionary. I really like Amy. But think that Stacey Abrams would be the bomb. She's very bright. I don't think that the far left warriors can get too bent out of shape by Abrams. While I don't think that Biden needs help nailing down the black vote; SA will unite the democratic party as much as is possible.

After the debate with Sanders tonight, I am inclined to believe that Biden has already chosen Warren. He made the surprise announcement that he would commit to picking a woman, and that caught Sanders by surprise. Sanders made a rather weak "me, too" commitment. Both men are seeking Warren's endorsement, and she has wisely refused to endorse either. Biden went out of his way to praise her by name, but he didn't single out any other woman in the race.

I would be very surprised if he picked Stacey Abrams, who disappointed Democrats by not seeking to run in a statewide race again. She has some national name recognition, but it has really faded since she almost won the governorship. Amy Klobuchar would shore up Biden's credentials with moderate Democrats and Republicans, but he doesn't need her help to win those votes. Similarly, Kamala Harris might help Biden with Black voters and moderates, but she wouldn't bring him a new constituency. Warren is out of favor with the "Bernie bro" faction of Sanders' base, but most of his supporters aren't in that category. I think that Warren would be exactly the right candidate to reconcile the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic base. So (and I admit a certain amount of wishful thinking), I will hereby commit to the prediction that Biden will pick Warren for his VP running mate. I could be wrong, but when has that ever happened before?

 

[Patooka]

Her candidacy is about ending US involvement in its numerous wars in distant lands, she tells us. She claims that Trump also promised that, but he obviously didn't deliver. She also neglected the various other issues that her fellow Democrats have addressed, like healthcare and climate change.

I've seen some speculation that she might be aiming for a career as a Fox News Democrat, a Democrat who likes to bash other Democrats.

FOX News policy clearly stipulates only one Democrat bashing Democrat at a time. For a long time it was Dick Morris. Now it's Donna Brazille's turn. Tulsi just has to wait.

 

[southernhybrid]

I think that Biden needs to pick a VP who is younger and visionary. I really like Amy. But think that Stacey Abrams would be the bomb. She's very bright. I don't think that the far left warriors can get too bent out of shape by Abrams. While I don't think that Biden needs help nailing down the black vote; SA will unite the democratic party as much as is possible.

After the debate with Sanders tonight, I am inclined to believe that Biden has already chosen Warren. He made the surprise announcement that he would commit to picking a woman, and that caught Sanders by surprise. Sanders made a rather weak "me, too" commitment. Both men are seeking Warren's endorsement, and she has wisely refused to endorse either. Biden went out of his way to praise her by name, but he didn't single out any other woman in the race.

I would be very surprised if he picked Stacey Abrams, who disappointed Democrats by not seeking to run in a statewide race again. She has some national name recognition, but it has really faded since she almost won the governorship. Amy Klobuchar would shore up Biden's credentials with moderate Democrats and Republicans, but he doesn't need her help to win those votes. Similarly, Kamala Harris might help Biden with Black voters and moderates, but she wouldn't bring him a new constituency. Warren is out of favor with the "Bernie bro" faction of Sanders' base, but most of his supporters aren't in that category. I think that Warren would be exactly the right candidate to reconcile the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic base. So (and I admit a certain amount of wishful thinking), I will hereby commit to the prediction that Biden will pick Warren for his VP running mate. I could be wrong, but when has that ever happened before?

I think he will choose someone younger than Warren. It might not be Stacey, but I doubt it will be Warren. There is also quite a bit of pressure on him to choose a minority woman and he has stated that his choice will reflect the makeup of the country. That doesn't seem to point to another older white person. But, we are all really just guessing. Soon we will know who his choice will be. I read a list of possible candidates and Warren wasn't on it. Stacey was, but so were several other minority women.

 

[lpetrich]

Elizabeth Warren did better with college-educated white men than with working-class women - Vox
In her current home state of Massachusetts, according to exit polling, white voters, she did indeed do well among female college graduates, and not quite as well among male ones, and even less among non-graduates of both sexes. Nonwhites were comparable to male college graduates.

Among white voters, Bernie Sanders did the best among male non-grads, then female non-grads, then male grads, then female grads. Nonwhites were comparable to female grads. Joe Biden did the best among female non-grads, then male non-grads, then male grads, then female grads, then nonwhites.

But sexism did play a part, at least according to Sexism is Probably One Reason Why Elizabeth Warren Didn't Do Better The Data for Progress researchers measured "hostile sexism" with these four questions:

1. Most women interpret innocent remarks or acts as being sexist.
2. Women are too easily offended.
3. Most women fail to appreciate fully all that men do for them.
4. Women seek to gain power by getting control over men.

Non-hostile sexism is things like believing that women need to be protected.

Voters that score higher in this hostile-sexism measure were less likely to support EW than her two male rivals at this point.

New polling shows how much sexism is hurting the Democratic women running for president. - The Washington Post
Democratic primary voters tend to be less hostile sexist than other Americans, though there is some overlap. More than 1/4 of Democratic primary voters score higher than average Americans there.

There is a clear trend with greater hostile sexism: less support for the two female candidates asked about, EW and Kamala Harris, and more support for the three male candidates, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Pete Buttigieg.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Youngish and ready to hit the ground running should the need arise. Or fill in during Joe's nap time.

I've lost respect for Warren. She looks more and more like an opportunist. Still think she could do the job and do it well but character counts.

I still like Amy Klobuchar or maybe Maggie Hassan. I like the idea of someone with experience as governor.

 

[southernhybrid]

I knew a couple of women who wanted to support Warren but they were worried that she couldn't beat Trump in the general. It's moot now because she dropped out before early voting started here. Our Trump like governor has delayed our primary until May 19th. That's when we were supposed to have our Senate etc primary. I already voted in the presidential primary during early voting, so I am wondering if checking who already voted in the presidential primary will slow the lines down a lot in May. This is going to be a mess. We only had one week to go before our presidential primary. It seems there could be a better way of dealing with this, like limiting the number of people in line, providing hand sanitizer etc. There was a huge bottle of hand sanitizer near the machines when I voted early. Of course, the best solution would be to use mail in voting for all. Some states are planning on doing that now, but our governor is known for making it more difficult for people to vote.

 

[southernhybrid]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/16/us/politics/joe-biden-vp-running-mate.html

Mr. Biden has mentioned by name, or alluded to, a long list of potential running mates that includes many of his former rivals.

During an interview with NBC News last week, he proactively mentioned Senator Amy Klobuchar.

A day after Senator Kamala Harris dropped out, Mr. Biden said: “She can be the president one day herself. She can be the vice president. She can go on to be a Supreme Court justice.” He has expressed openness to Ms. Warren, though more recently he emphasized her value in the Senate.

And in November, he alluded to several women outside of Washington, without explicitly naming them: Sally Q. Yates, the acting attorney general who was fired by President Trump early in his term; Stacey Abrams, the former Georgia House minority leader and 2018 nominee for governor; and Senators Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire.

Other names generating chatter include Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Senator Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Representative Val Demings of Florida.

Representative James E. Clyburn, the South Carolina Democrat who played an influential role in reviving Mr. Biden’s once-flagging campaign, said in an interview with Axios on HBO that he preferred that Mr. Biden select an African-American woman for the ticket.

“I promise you,” Mr. Biden said during the MSNBC interview, “My administration, from vice president on, is going to look like the country.”

 

[southernhybrid]

Youngish and ready to hit the ground running should the need arise. Or fill in during Joe's nap time.

I've lost respect for Warren. She looks more and more like an opportunist. Still think she could do the job and do it well but character counts.

I still like Amy Klobuchar or maybe Maggie Hassan. I like the idea of someone with experience as governor.

I don't know. Those do seem kind of bland. I just read a little about Hassan. She was the governor of a state which is mostly white and has a population of about 1.2 million. Stacey was the minority leader in the Georgia Congress. We have over 8 million people in Georgia. To me, that experience is just a relevant as being governor of a small state. Plus Georgia has a minority population of almost 40 percent. I think that's very important since the base of the Democratic Party is made up of a large percentage of minority voters. The other thing that I love about Stacey is her ability to attract both progressive and moderate voters. If not now, hopefully one day she will be in a powerful leadership position.

Of course, we are playing pundit again, and I will vote for Biden regardless of who he chooses for VP. I just have a preference for a woman who is a minority and has some leadership experience in a very diverse state.

 

[Politesse]

Well, Biden's general strategy has been to try and recapture the magical blandness of Hillary 2016. Is Tim Kaine still available? What about John Edwards?

 

[Toni]

And you can continue to wag your finger and "tsk" about it, or you can face reality. Young voters lean liberal, but they don't trust the Democratic Party to advocate for them, partly because it's head honchos constantly mock them publically and scorn the idea that youth votes are even important to try for... until they are. We're smart enough to see that giving the DNC a blank check always, always results in either non-action or backwards movement, and that genuinely liberal projects are only pursued when and if the Party is facing considerable pressure, election-losing pressure, from Progressive critics.

If 100% true, why did younger voters vote in greater numbers for a moderate, Obama, rather than Sanders? The younger voter turnout is smaller for Sanders than it was under Obama.

Because he didn't market himself as a middle-of-the-road, status quo worshiping centrist when he was on the campaign trail. He was that, but that was not the basis of his campaign. And I think his ultimate betrayal of Progressive causes did hurt voter turnout in this election, and is a major problem for Biden, whose association with Obama is one of the definable qualities most Americans know about him.

I do agree that Abrams would be a sensible VP pick for Biden.

See, I NEVER saw Obama as a progressive candidate so I find it hard to feel betrayed by him. He was as progressive as the first black POTUS could dare to be, as sad a statement about the US as that is. We would never have elected a black progressive in 2008 or 2012. Probably not for another 20 years. I don't think we'll ever elect a woman in my lifetime unless it would be Nikki Haley, whom I expect to make a run for 2024.

I disagreed with Obama from time to time, sometimes sharply but I always recognized him as a centrist--or perhaps the word I always thought of: a pragmatist.

 

[Toni]

Well, Biden's general strategy has been to try and recapture the magical blandness of Hillary 2016. Is Tim Kaine still available? What about John Edwards?

He has said he'll choose a woman as running mate. Let's hope it's someone with a big name.

I also see the wisdom of being...centrist, in a time like this. We need to win over some of the GOP and we won't do that with Sanders. Not just to elect a Democrat but to move the country away from the far right that the GOP has been tilting towards.

Centrist may not be exciting but it will be effective.

 

[Copernicus]

I still like Warren for the spot, because Biden never organized a decent campaign organization. Warren comes equipped with a very extensive one. A lot of folks are tossing around names that have close to zero name recognition nationwide. So, if I must give up on the most qualified candidate--Warren--I'll hedge my bet on Kamala Harris, who has impressed Biden a lot. She is extremely sharp and is compatible with Biden's centrism. I just think that he strength with African American voters is overestimated, and she won't do anything at all to appeal to Sanders voters other than be African American and female. Still, she is a skilled campaigner.

 

[Toni]

Youngish and ready to hit the ground running should the need arise. Or fill in during Joe's nap time.

I've lost respect for Warren. She looks more and more like an opportunist. Still think she could do the job and do it well but character counts.

Can you please explain the above?

 

[Politesse]

Because he didn't market himself as a middle-of-the-road, status quo worshiping centrist when he was on the campaign trail. He was that, but that was not the basis of his campaign. And I think his ultimate betrayal of Progressive causes did hurt voter turnout in this election, and is a major problem for Biden, whose association with Obama is one of the definable qualities most Americans know about him.

I do agree that Abrams would be a sensible VP pick for Biden.

See, I NEVER saw Obama as a progressive candidate so I find it hard to feel betrayed by him. He was as progressive as the first black POTUS could dare to be, as sad a statement about the US as that is. We would never have elected a black progressive in 2008 or 2012. Probably not for another 20 years. I don't think we'll ever elect a woman in my lifetime unless it would be Nikki Haley, whom I expect to make a run for 2024.

I disagreed with Obama from time to time, sometimes sharply but I always recognized him as a centrist--or perhaps the word I always thought of: a pragmatist.

Likewise. I had somewhat low expectations going in, though I was dismayed by the degree to which he seemingly came to love the war games and extrajudicial killings now associated with the White House. And the pogrom of illegal immigrants. If liberals won't stand against these things, I don't know who will. I hate to agree with your thoughts on the electability of black Progressive candidates at this point, but you're not wrong.