US Politics: Ready, Set, Announce! Bookering the Odds

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 hours ago, DMC said:

Klobuchar is a non-factor.  Outside of @Tywin et al.'s dreams.

I did say she has a very slim chance of winning. Not sure why you’re so down on Brown’s chances though.  

10 hours ago, DMC said:

Great VP candidate.  Won't overshadow anybody and will never embarrass you.

Oh really? I once watched her sneeze directly in a woman’s face. To be fair, she was trying to avoid sneezing in a baby’s face, but still, it was hilarious.   

9 hours ago, Kalbear said:

I think she's a perfectly decent politician who has almost no ability to energize a single person. She's a revamped Al Gore. The energy of her compared to Harris or Booker or even Biden is unfair. 

I like her fine, but she's very dull. 

She suffers from the same thing Romney and Hillary got knocked for. People who know them privately will tell you they’re a blast, but they’re too rigged, scripted and safe in public.    

[Rippounet]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Weed is an objectively and demonstrably less dangerous substance than either alcohol or tobacco.

According to some studies, good cocaine may be less dangerous than most alcohols.

[OldGimletEye]

7 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Lol, were you watching CNN too? There’s this rotund, balding lawyer who worked in the WH for Trump who is so aggressive and obnoxious who was arguing universal healthcare is socialist with a black Democrat (Bacardi?) on Cuomo’s show, and Bacardi was making all of your points, including the FDR one, and the Republican kept yelling ‘don’t change the topic’ and he kept answering ‘I’m not changing the topic, it’s the same topic!’, so the Dem’s must be following this strategy!

Suffice to say, I have been around a lot of Republicans and conservatives during my life and I know all their little games. And, well, I know how to play games too. In fact, when they want to play games, I can too. Call me Milton Bradley.

When Republicans start with the socialist crap, it's easy to lay a trap for them, and when they walk into it, what can I say? It's one hell of a hoot to start turning the screws.

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Not sure why you’re so down on Brown’s chances though.

Because I've watched him try to persuade people on television for the past decade.  I guess this is a fair point though.  Intuitively I know Brown and Klobuchar have no chance as presidential candidates, but when asked to articulate why the explanation lacks any type of eloquence.  They're boring, plain and simple.

6 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

According to some studies, good cocaine may be less dangerous than most alcohols.

Don't see the relevance of that, but those studies are pretty fucking stupid.  Coke ruins lives much more rapidly, and of course:

 

[Fez]

41 minutes ago, DMC said:

First and foremost because it's not physically addictive, while tobacco executives have spent the past 200 years making cigarettes as addictive as heroin and coke.

Marijuana is physically addictive, though far less so than tobacco. Marijuana Use Disorder, having a dependency on marijuana, exists and is estimated to be found in somewhere between 10% and 30% of regular users. The key difference from more serious drugs is that marijuana withdrawal is relatively easy to get through. It's similar caffeine addiction, except that caffeine withdrawal only lasts a couple days, whereas marijuana withdrawal can last up to two weeks. Around 100,000 people volunteering seek substance use treatment services for marijuana addiction each year; with others, especially youth, entering treatment as part of court orders (though for these people treatment is not necessarily needed; judges and parole officers usually don't look closely enough at case details).

[OldGimletEye]

Yeah, but real Americans like putting down a pack of Marlboros while getting falling down drunk. I mean John Wayne smoked 5 packs day.

While hippies like marijuana.

Therefore marijuana should remain illegal.

[Maithanet]

I think I've said this before, but I can't help but think that the two big stars of 2018 who fell just short (Abrams and Beto) look like the ideal VP candidates this year.  They both bring youth and charisma and can help balance out the ticket for whoever gets the nod.  In addition, you wouldn't have to worry about losing a senate or governor's spot. So Harris/O'Rourke or Biden/Abrams both look like great tickets. 

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Don't see the relevance of that, but those studies are pretty fucking stupid.  Coke ruins lives much more rapidly, and of course:

It's as relevant as you pointing out that weed is less harmful than tobacco and alcohol. Harmfulness of one product relative to another is meaningless when discussing public health issues. I would have expected you of all people to know that.
Glad you agree that coke is shit though.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Because I've watched him try to persuade people on television for the past decade.  I guess this is a fair point though.  Intuitively I know Brown and Klobuchar have no chance as presidential candidates, but when asked to articulate why the explanation lacks any type of eloquence.  They're boring, plain and simple.

So? Boring candidates get nominated all the time. Clinton was boring. So was Romney. And McCain. And Kerry. And Gore. And Dole. And H. W. And Mondale. And Carter. Frankly the electric candidate is more of an outlier. I can only think of three truly charismatic nominees since JFK changed the game. I don’t think Brown is anywhere near the favorite, but he would be considered a tier one candidate if he throws his hat in the ring.

29 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Biden

Speaking of which, Scrappy Joe needs to s*** or get off the pot. He’s sucking oxygen out of the room at the moment as he consistently out-polls everyone else. Same goes for Sanders to a lesser extent. The two of them collectively keep polling at over 50%.  

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

So? Boring candidates get nominated all the time. Clinton was boring. So was Romney. And McCain. And Kerry. And Gore. And Dole. And H. W. And Mondale. And Carter. Frankly the electric candidate is more of an outlier. I can only think of three truly charismatic nominees since JFK changed the game. I don’t think Brown is anywhere near the favorite, but he would be considered a tier one candidate if he throws his hat in the ring.

Speaking of which, Scrappy Joe needs to s*** or get off the pot. He’s sucking oxygen out of the room at the moment as he consistently out-polls everyone else. Same goes for Sanders to a lesser extent. The two of them collectively keep polling at over 50%.  

Assuming you mean Hillary and not Bill, what do most of the people you listed have in common?  They lost.

[Fez]

Mark Herring, the Virginia AG, has admitted he wore blackface at a college party in 1980. He was dressing like a rapper from the time, named Kurtis Blow, and performed one of his songs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/va-atty-gen-herring-appears-in-blackface-in-photo-from-college-days/2019/02/06/9aa4aff8-2a26-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?utm_term=.a0a9482c7e45

Herring is a Democrat and the third in the state succession line after the Governor and Lt. Governor (who are both in their own scandals, remember). If all three went down before any replacements were named, the Republican Speaker of the House, Kirkland Cox, would become Governor (who, I think would not resign even if he ends up in his own blackface scandal).

I suspect that will not happen, but things are a serious mess right now for the state party. I do suspect that Northam will point to this as proof that wearing blackface was common among whites in Virginia in the early '80s (which I think was true) and downplay his own scandal; unless he sticks with his current claim that he's not in the photo.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Fez said:

Mark Herring, the Virginia AG, has admitted he wore blackface at a college party in 1980. He was dressing like a rapper from the time, named Kurtis Blow, and performed one of his songs.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/va-atty-gen-herring-appears-in-blackface-in-photo-from-college-days/2019/02/06/9aa4aff8-2a26-11e9-984d-9b8fba003e81_story.html?utm_term=.a0a9482c7e45

Herring is a Democrat and the third in the state succession line after the Governor and Lt. Governor (who are both in their own scandals, remember). If all three went down before any replacements were named, the Republican Speaker of the House, Kirkland Cox, would become Governor (who, I think would not resign even if he ends up in his own blackface scandal).

I suspect that will not happen, but things are a serious mess right now for the state party. I do suspect that Northam will point to this as proof that wearing blackface was common among whites in Virginia in the early '80s (which I think was true) and downplay his own scandal; unless he sticks with his current claim that he's not in the photo.

I was just getting ready to come post that.  After the historic gains in 2017, this string of bad news bodes ill for the elections later this year.  So far, however, it appears that the Fairfax allegations are not very credible, so I hope Northam resigns and Fairfax takes over.  I'm not quite sure what to make about the AG's announcement. 

 

[Fez]

3 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I was just getting ready to come post that.  After the historic gains in 2017, this string of bad news bodes ill for the elections later this year.  So far, however, it appears that the Fairfax allegations are not very credible, so I hope Northam resigns and Fairfax takes over.  I'm not quite sure what to make about the AG's announcement. 

There's already been reports that the state party is turning to former Gov. McAuliffe and current Sen. Kaine to be the main statewide spokespeople for the legislative elections this November (I guess Sen. Warner will be too busy readying himself for his 2020 reelection campaign). Hopefully neither of them have scandals too (my guess is if they do they won't be blackface related, Kaine grew up in Kansas and McAliffe in New York).

Also, considering the Republican Party in Virginia just ran an election based primarily on preserving Confederate monuments in the state, I don't think they are in a position to flip back the suburbs, which are where the marginal districts that can be flipped are. The danger is whether too many African American voters stay home in disgust, but they generally live in districts that are safely Democratic.

From his statement at least, Herring's incident is of a less severe variety than Northam's, and if nothing changes I doubt he resigns. I doubt Northam or Fairfax resign either for that matter, and even if they do, I'm sure things will be timed so that either Northam or a short-term gov. Fairfax appoints a new Democratic Lt. Gov who can then become Governor. The idea that all three resign at once and hand over power to Republicans seems extremely farfetched to me, especially this state Republican party.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Speaking of which, Scrappy Joe needs to s*** or get off the pot. He’s sucking oxygen out of the room at the moment as he consistently out-polls everyone else. Same goes for Sanders to a lesser extent. The two of them collectively keep polling at over 50%.  

I think Joe, Bernie and (maybe) Beto are all playing a strategic game, hoping some of the early announcers will flame out (Gabbard for example - and probably Warren after the new reports about identifying herself as Native American on her bar application). 

They're most likely gaming out how to respond to some of the moves by Booker and Harris (who are, imo, really the only two heavy hitters in the game right now - Klobuchar probably should have announced earlier, and I personally think Gillibrand will be a non-factor). 

Warren can't campaign for shit (unfortunately), which most likely shores up Bernie's support on the left-wing. Biden is likely waiting to see how big donors will respond to Harris and Booker, to see if they'll siphon off funding he'll need to run. 

Beto is off being Beto, and might run or might not. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

38 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Assuming you mean Hillary and not Bill, what do most of the people you listed have in common?  They lost.

Eh, Carter and Bush did win while Hillary and Gore won the popular vote. Some of the others were ahead in the polls at some points in their races. Dole is the only one I listed that really had no shot. The point is being kind of boring isn’t an automatic DQ.

[Larry of the Lawn]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Eh, Carter and Bush did win while Hillary and Gore won the popular vote. Some of the others were ahead in the polls at some points in their races. Dole is the only one I listed that really had no shot. The point is being kind of boring isn’t an automatic DQ.

Again, a list of losers and a couple guys who served one term as Pres.  Boring might not be an automatic disqualifier but it's pretty fucking close, so I'm not sure why we should be settling for boring candidates.  

[Maithanet]

19 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I think Joe, Bernie and (maybe) Beto are all playing a strategic game, hoping some of the early announcers will flame out (Gabbard for example - and probably Warren after the new reports about identifying herself as Native American on her bar application). 

They're most likely gaming out how to respond to some of the moves by Booker and Harris (who are, imo, really the only two heavy hitters in the game right now - Klobuchar probably should have announced earlier, and I personally think Gillibrand will be a non-factor). 

Warren can't campaign for shit (unfortunately), which most likely shores up Bernie's support on the left-wing. Biden is likely waiting to see how big donors will respond to Harris and Booker, to see if they'll siphon off funding he'll need to run. 

Beto is off being Beto, and might run or might not. 

This is good take.  I think that Sanders is trying to get a real read on whether the support he has in polling will last if he throws his hat in the ring.  It's possible he's a "placeholder" candidate just like Biden, and plenty of those people will eventually find they prefer Harris or Beto or Brown. 

I think that Warren and Gabbard are all but finished.  Possibly Gillibrand too.  With this crowded a field, you can't afford early missteps. 

One important factor to see is whether candidates who are clearly failing to catch on will be able to (or have a desire to) limp along to Iowa, or if they just call it quits in the next few months.  If real winnowing starts taking place prior to voting, I think that might give second tier candidates more oxygen to challenge the bigger names.  Assuming they can actually run their campaign effectively, gradually build a modest support base, etc.  If so, I could see people like Castro, Klobuchar or several potential governors having more of a shot.  But if it's a 20 person field by debate time, I think most people are just going to get swallowed up in the noise. 

[Mexal]

If Beto announces, it'll be towards the end of the month. He has a bunch of stuff coming out in March (documentary, something else) and he will use that positive March press to launch his candidacy.

[lokisnow]

I think Bernie’s position is very interesting, I don’t think he especially wants to run, his goal is to pull policy left, but he himself is too far left to play kingmaker unless the field is extremely fractured on several parts of the spectrum, but he also does not want to damage any 2020 candidate as much as he knows he damaged Clinton. He’s got a narrow tightrope to walk, in other words, whether or not he runs. And he also knows the running itself takes an intense physical toll, one he may not really want to repeat. 

Schultz actually gives him the most room to run his trademark angry old man routine and a clear villain to attack non stop. Bernie might actually be able to draw all of Schultz’s fire, which would be an interesting outcome—the two extremists running fighting nonstop would literally make everyone else that is running look like moderate, reasonable adults compared to those two, because the electorate would just tack to the middle between the two extremists, and reject them both.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

43 minutes ago, The Great Unwashed said:

I think Joe, Bernie and (maybe) Beto are all playing a strategic game, hoping some of the early announcers will flame out (Gabbard for example - and probably Warren after the new reports about identifying herself as Native American on her bar application). 

They're most likely gaming out how to respond to some of the moves by Booker and Harris (who are, imo, really the only two heavy hitters in the game right now - Klobuchar probably should have announced earlier, and I personally think Gillibrand will be a non-factor). 

Warren can't campaign for shit (unfortunately), which most likely shores up Bernie's support on the left-wing. Biden is likely waiting to see how big donors will respond to Harris and Booker, to see if they'll siphon off funding he'll need to run. 

Beto is off being Beto, and might run or might not. 

I agree with Maith, this is a good take. I basically agree with everything after the first paragraph. Personally I don’t think Sanders will run. His chances are slimmer this time around given the size of the field and there will be several candidates with similar positions to his unlike last time. And given the latter, I think he can stay out of it because he won. He has shifted the trajectory of the party and I think he’s good with that as his major prize for right now. Biden is trickier to predict. Personally I have no idea what he’ll do, but every day that goes by is a day that someone can gain ground on him, and it sounds like Harris is turning into a mini-juggernaut fundraising wise. If he’s going to run, I think it would be wise to get in sooner than later.