US Politics: Dead Pimps Need Not Apply

[Kalbear]

Oh this thread sucks now. 

On experience- both Obama and trump showed that means fuckall. If Beto is hot and has people fired up that is really much more about what matters than policy experience governing. Gods I wish that were not true, but it is. 

Beto also isn't trying to go after only white people and telling minorities to wait their turn. I doubt he would have the same animosity. 

[Week]

Just now, Kalbear said:

Beto also isn't trying to go after only white people and telling minorities to wait their turn. I doubt he would have the same animosity. 

Yup, true time and time again (even this week).

[DMC]

1 hour ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Writing off Biden, Sanders, and Warren on age grounds is a bit odd given that Trump himself will be 74 on election day 2020. 

That's exactly the point though - contrast.  Trump is old, so nominate someone that doesn't look like they just came out of some weird sci-fi chamber.  Further, my prior is it will be more beneficial to emphasize contrasts in terms of women and/or minorities as well.  We won't know that for awhile, but we should get at least the beginning of an idea in the next few months - in fact from what I'm hearing we might have a decent amount of polls by Christmas.

1 hour ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Chris Christie, Paul Ryan...Elizabeth Warren had a better chance in 2016 than she'll have in 2020.

The best example of this is Mario Cuomo in 1992.  I don't have any problem with Beto striking while the iron is hot.

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

If Beto is hot and has people fired up that is really much more about what matters than policy experience governing.

I agree policy experience doesn't matter, but the electoral experience of other candidates is a fundamentally different metric.

[Kalbear]

My suspicion is that you're wrong. With an incumbent in an economy that is okay you won't win by shaking it up too much. You want someone different in good ways but not insanely so. Otherwise moderates will be afraid to take that risk. We see this with corporate culture too- how women only get to be CEOs when the company is hosed, and the safe pick is picked otherwise. 

[The Anti-Targ]

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Oh this thread sucks now. 

On experience- both Obama and trump showed that means fuckall. If Beto is hot and has people fired up that is really much more about what matters than policy experience governing. Gods I wish that were not true, but it is. 

Beto also isn't trying to go after only white people and telling minorities to wait their turn. I doubt he would have the same animosity. 

There are really only 2 things the challenging party can do when it comes to running against an incumbent going for a second term: nominate a charismatic and / or war hero candidate and; gain a party mandate - after the midterm elections hold more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections. IN this respect the senate situation doesn't matter, since only rarely does a senate election cycle represent a national referendum, of sorts, the house elections is always a measure of the national mood.

The Democrats achieved the second condition. Now they need to focus on the first. Biden and Warren aren't up to snuff on the charisma / war hero condition. And Democrats should probably avoid war heroes, because he/she is likely to be swiftboated mercilessly to the point of negating that attribute. Whereas it's impossible to negate charisma.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

My suspicion is that you're wrong. With an incumbent in an economy that is okay you won't win by shaking it up too much. You want someone different in good ways but not insanely so. Otherwise moderates will be afraid to take that risk. We see this with corporate culture too- how women only get to be CEOs when the company is hosed, and the safe pick is picked otherwise. 

I don't know how you've evaluated an opinion of mine that I haven't even started to make.  As you mentioned, a lot of it is conditional on the state of the economy.  As for Beto, he may turn out to be that candidate that shakes things up.  But you know what?  So could tons of other candidates.  But thanks for telling me I'm wrong months before I make a decision.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

21 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

On experience- both Obama and trump showed that means fuckall. If Beto is hot and has people fired up that is really much more about what matters than policy experience governing. Gods I wish that were not true, but it is. 

Lol yeah, now that you mention it, it's hard to think of a more experienced non-incumbent than Hillary Clinton, and we saw how much that mattered. Maybe Herbert Walker Bush the first time he ran. And now that I think of it, didn't he also lose a Senate race in Texas before he wound up in the White House? Anyway, point is, let 'em all run. Black, white, young, old, men, women, trans, mormon, muslim, christian, jew, atheist, whatever the fuck.

[Jace, Extat]

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

There are really only 2 things the challenging party can do when it comes to running against an incumbent going for a second term: nominate a charismatic and / or war hero candidate and; gain a party mandate - after the midterm elections hold more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections. IN this respect the senate situation doesn't matter, since only rarely does a senate election cycle represent a national referendum, of sorts, the house elections is always a measure of the national mood.

The Democrats achieved the second condition. Now they need to focus on the first. Biden and Warren aren't up to snuff on the charisma / war hero condition. And Democrats should probably avoid war heroes, because he/she is likely to be swiftboated mercilessly to the point of negating that attribute. Whereas it's impossible to negate charisma.

We call her songbird Tammy Duckworth.

[DireWolfSpirit]

 So im wondering how long the Florida recounts are going to take? They are both supposed to be hand recounts I thought I read?

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

Lol, Florida recounts again. What was that Mark Twain quote about how history doesn't repeat itself so much as rhyme?

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

And now that I think of it, didn't he also lose a Senate race in Texas before he wound up in the White House?

Well, he lost a Senate race when he had very little experience in 70, so I don't get how that supports your point.  Interesting footnote - he lost to Lloyd Bentsen, who was Dukakis' VP running mate in 1988 and is the guy saying the "you're no Jack Kennedy" quote to Dan Quayle.

9 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

 So im wondering how long the Florida recounts are going to take? They are both supposed to be hand recounts I thought I read?

State law mandates a machine recount if it's within 0.5 percent, hand recount if it's within 0.25.  The Senate race will have a hand recount which should take quite awhile.  The gubernatorial race, however, is likely to only reach the machine recount threshold, so it shouldn't take too long.

[Darzin]

I'm in in on the Beto 2020 bandwagon we need someone with charisma to beat Trump and he has it. Plus his youth and looks will make a stunning contrast to a haggard and dyed Trump.

I also think Beto being a white male will help him win. It'll be harder to rile up the Trump base against a white male, and it will soothe the fears of the suburban moderates who jumped ship and voted for democrats this election. Do I like this? no, it's a stunning indictment of the American electorate. But in 2016 Trump showed that racism and sexism were two of his biggest weapons. Nominating Beto diffuses those while keeping the ever fickle progressive base motivated.

 

 

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

26 minutes ago, Darzin said:

I also think Beto being a white male will help him win. It'll be harder to rile up the Trump base against a white male, and it will soothe the fears of the suburban moderates who jumped ship and voted for democrats this election. Do I like this? no, it's a stunning indictment of the American electorate. But in 2016 Trump showed that racism and sexism were two of his biggest weapons. Nominating Beto diffuses those while keeping the ever fickle progressive base motivated.

If we're going after the knuckle-draggers Avenatti is a way better choice

[Darzin]

3 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

If we're going after the knuckle-draggers Avenatti is a way better choice

Haha true but I don't mean going after them so much as not enraging them.  Also somewhere in the darkest corner of my heart I want the Democrats to elect him speaker.

[karaddin]

3 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Writing off Biden, Sanders, and Warren on age grounds is a bit odd given that Trump himself will be 74 on election day 2020. 

The GOP are the party of the elderly and their base turns out for different things. Age doesn't hurt Trump, but it could hurt youth turn out - they want people who will change things, not reinforce the status quo.

2 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

Now, you're already seeing people in this thread saying that other people in this thread, even people who pay a lot of attention to politics I might add, are only liking Beto because of bias or bigotry or what the fuck ever. So yeah, I'm pretty sure if Beto runs in 2020, then "Beto-bro" will become a thing pretty damn quick.

This is your second post in this thread getting pissy, the first was the crack about intersectionality. To this quoted post I'd say you're taking something personally that was never meant to be. Mormont didn't say that any individual is racist for supporting Beto, but I think he was alluding to bias which you're somehow offended about as well. Racial bias is a thing and it doesn't mean a person is damned for having it, it permeates all of society. You could take the same person and they'd be perceived as more charismatic etc when people see them as a white man than anything else, and it's not just how individuals as observers perceive it, but how the media report him, how people talk about him etc. It may well be that he is the best pick because at the end of the day winning is important and those factors may make him the most likely to win. That wouldn't eliminate those factors.

As for your crack at intersectionality...you're trying to weld a coalition of diverse people into getting behind the same person, and every demographic in that coalition is more loyal to the party than straight white people. So yeah, if you want to maximise turn out from groups that vote for Democrats at 70-90+% rates then you better fucking take their opinions into account and ensure that they have opportunities to succeed within the party as well.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

1 hour ago, karaddin said:

The GOP are the party of the elderly and their base turns out for different things. Age doesn't hurt Trump, but it could hurt youth turn out - they want people who will change things, not reinforce the status quo.

Y'know, I'm looking at the numbers and noticing a trend. Impoverished black women voted in a white lawyer in Alabama, a guy named O'Rourke got the Latino vote 2-1 in Texas over a guy named Cruz, a Latina millennial knocked a veteran Democrat incumbent off his seat in New York, a transgender woman took a district that previously considered an exclusionary bathroom bill, and the guy getting the biggest crowds of young people is a 77 year old white dude.

I don't think the electorate give as much of a shit about labels as the internet/bubble/hivemind would have us believe.

[DMC]

The age gap is just as prominent as the Latino vote.  It's not rocket science to think under 45 year olds would prefer a candidate that is under 70.  Moreover, Biden/Sanders/Warren are retreads.  At least the first two, and the third had bad timing.  Anyone else will suggest something new, which as the last half of this thread has demonstrated is a very important thing for people.  It's just they don't realize Harris/Gillibrand/Booker are as new to most of the electorate as Beto..or Gillum or Abrams.

[Gone and Quite Forgotten]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

The age gap is just as prominent as the Latino vote.  It's not rocket science to think under 45 year olds would prefer a candidate that is under 70.  Moreover, Biden/Sanders/Warren are retreads.  At least the first two, and the third had bad timing.  Anyone else will suggest something new, which as the last half of this thread has demonstrated is a very important thing for people.  It's just they don't realize Harris/Gillibrand/Booker are as new to most of the electorate as Beto..or Gillum or Abrams.

Bullshit Sanders doesn't offer anything new. With the possible exception of Trump himself, I cannot think of anyone whose gotten liberal young people off the bench more in the past few cycles.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Bullshit Sanders doesn't offer anything new.

Well, I'd say what Sanders has offered is indeed bullshit, but not new at all.  But there's no point to revisit this disagreement.  I don't like Sanders, you apparently do.  Ok, that ain't gonna change.

[karaddin]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, I'd say what Sanders has offered is indeed bullshit, but not new at all.  But there's no point to revisit this disagreement.  I don't like Sanders, you apparently do.  Ok, that ain't gonna change.

The idea of openly calling yourself a socialist and getting traction was at least refreshing if not new, but that was 2016. In 2020 you need to have moved on from 2020, nominating Sanders will just keep the left re-litigating 2016 for 8 years instead of 4. Especially after he loses to Trump as well. Or maybe that would settle things finally since theyd have both lost at that point?