Too Soon To Start Thinking About 2020? No, it's 2020!

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:06 pm

coopasonic wrote: Tue Jan 29, 2019 10:20 am
Jeff V wrote: Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:09 pm Charisma has been pretty important ever since JFK and this will continue. If nothing else, Trump has pointed out just how shallow voters can be.
We aren't calling Trump charismatic, are we? As a borderline sociopath that people seem to like for some reason I kind of get how it works, but Trump?

He certainly is a godhead for the deplorables, most which presumably helped make him a reality show person of something. Since there doesn't seem to be an intelligent thought in that orange noggin of his, I think his charisma is all that he has.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:06 pm

It can still have the same effect; assuming that poll numbers stay consistent, most moderates/independents aren't going to vote for Trump. Presumably they would vote for the Democrat if it were a two party race. In a three party race, at least some of those voters would go to Shultz.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:07 pm

Yeah, I don't think the big risk is that Democratic voters would vote for him over the Democratic nominee. The bigger worry is that soft Republicans or conservative-leaning independents who are disinclined to vote for Trump would end up pulling the lever for an independent candidate rather than the Democratic nominee. And because Trump is deeply unpopular, his election strategy will likely be going all in on driving up the negatives of the Democratic nominee rather than run on his own platform (which at this point has been reduced to talking about a wall... talk about thinking small). That kind of election strategy where you're trying to get voters to hate everyone on the ballot really benefits from having as many alternative candidates as possible. Split the vote enough and maybe you can squeak by with only winning 42%.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:18 pm

I don't know if we might want to start thinking about breaking off threads for some of the legit candidates. But, for now, this thread works.

Kamala Harris is definitely going to have some issues regarding her time as San Francisco DA and California attorney general before she got to the US Senate. This Twitter thread about some of her truancy efforts is pretty damning.

https://twitter.com/WalkerBragman/statu ... 1030797312

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:30 pm

At least she is tough on crime!

noxiousdog · Post by **noxiousdog** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:37 pm

I don't that that will have any effect on her candidacy. If anything it helps with more conservative leaning folks like myself.

I'm guessing that if the crackdown showed significant negative effects she would have found an alternative, but that's just me guessing since she used statistics to enact the policy in the first place.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 2:18 pm

Captain Caveman wrote: Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:07 pm Yeah, I don't think the big risk is that Democratic voters would vote for him over the Democratic nominee. The bigger worry is that soft Republicans or conservative-leaning independents who are disinclined to vote for Trump would end up pulling the lever for an independent candidate rather than the Democratic nominee. And because Trump is deeply unpopular, his election strategy will likely be going all in on driving up the negatives of the Democratic nominee rather than run on his own platform (which at this point has been reduced to talking about a wall... talk about thinking small). That kind of election strategy where you're trying to get voters to hate everyone on the ballot really benefits from having as many alternative candidates as possible. Split the vote enough and maybe you can squeak by with only winning 42%.

It's just not obvious to me that "soft republicans or conservative-leaning independents" would break disproportionately for Democrats at the end of the day in 2020 absent Shultz. That's going to depend on the Democratic nominee at least somewhat, of course, but I imagine that there are a lot of soft Republicans who dislike Trump but who would have a hard time voting for a Democrat (especially if it's Sanders), and Shultz could be a non-Trump outlet for people who would otherwise vote Trump.

Basically the question is whether (Shultz voters who would vote for the Democratic nominee if forced) > (Shultz voters who would vote for Trump if forced). Maybe, but it's far from obvious.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 2:18 pm

noxiousdog wrote: Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:37 pm I don't that that will have any effect on her candidacy. If anything it helps with more conservative leaning folks like myself.

I'm guessing that if the crackdown showed significant negative effects she would have found an alternative, but that's just me guessing since she used statistics to enact the policy in the first place.

I think the question is whether it will hurt her in the Democratic primary. I don't see it being a big issue in the general.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jan 29, 2019 3:47 pm

Holman wrote: Tue May 22, 2018 9:53 pm With Stacey Abrams winning today's Democratic primary, it's reasonably possible that Georgia (!!!) will elect the nation's first black woman Governor.

WaPo

The former Georgia gubernatorial candidate has been tapped by the Democrats to address the nation on Feb. 5 after President Trump’s speech to a joint session of Congress.

Abrams narrowly lost her race in November after a lengthy dispute over blocked votes, and her political future is the source of much speculation.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:28 am

Democratic lawmaker Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has been abandoned by her campaign manager and consulting firm just two and a half weeks after declaring her presidential bid, Politico reports.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/tulsi-gab ... g-2020-bid

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:40 am

I just watched the Morning Joe panel with Schultz. Just another narcissist. I really hope his run fails or he steps into the Democratic party because hearing him talk I just don't see him stealing more R-lean votes than D-lean votes. He is smack dab on the same spot in the political spectrum where Obama stood.

That is how he'll be positioned by the media. The Republicans will probably sell him that way and let the electoral math do the job. Heck Schultz himself buys strongly into that narrative himself except he has a delusion that he'll be so competitive across 50 states and that it'll change the nature of how elections will run in the future. Paraphrasing..."I am seeking transformative change by not depending on 8-10 states". I guess we will have to see if someone figures out his model and deconstructs it because he is courting disaster.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:56 am

egotistical billionaire asshole.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:32 am

Defiant wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 12:28 am
Democratic lawmaker Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) has been abandoned by her campaign manager and consulting firm just two and a half weeks after declaring her presidential bid, Politico reports.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/tulsi-gab ... g-2020-bid

Gabbard is such a nutball. It's bizarre that she was thinking that she would have a chance. Her claim to fame (aside from getting publicity for nutty opinions) is primarily due to being an early Sanders supporter and being a darling of the far left. But she can't compete when Sanders himself is likely to enter, and Warren already has. Plus she has a lot of views that wouldn't sit well on the progressive left (including her past opposition to gay marriage, and her relatively moderate voting record).

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:19 pm

Go to space, Howard Schultz. *chef kiss* - what a magnificent piece. Partial quote below:

Good news, everyone!

I have thought this all through very carefully, and I have decided what potential independent presidential candidate Howard Schultz should do.

He should go to space.

There are so many other things to do than mount a centrist bid for commander in chief when you are a billionaire with money burning a hole in your pocket. You can do what Bill Gates does and spend millions of dollars on your weird personal grudge against malaria. Or you can start SpaceX or Virgin Galactic, or you can buy a newspaper so its writers will have to say “Jeffrey P. Bezos, the founder and chief executive of Amazon, also owns The Washington Post” every time they mention you, which may not seem that consequential, but trust me, it really wears on the writer!

I understand that this strange thing happens to each billionaire in his time. He, the billionaire, looks over his works and feels incomplete.

“Sure,” he says to himself, “I have created a weird expensive car made of promises/a website where you can order any book but the entire industry of reading and publishing is a little bit destroyed/a dubious organization I use to take money from those who do not know better in exchange for useless degrees and equally dubious meat products. I have insulted rescue cave divers in strange terms/forced mayors across the country to fight to the death for my amusement/beseeched Vladimir Putin to become my best friend on Twitter. You will never guess what I managed to pay in taxes. But — is that all there is? Surely this cannot be all life holds!”

There are two responses to this, one healthy and the other unhealthy. One is to go to space. And the other is to run for president.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:51 pm

https://twitter.com/ShaneGoldmacher/sta ... 6384374785

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:58 pm

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1 ... 2856772610

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:59 pm

malchior wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:19 pm Go to space, Howard Schultz. *chef kiss* - what a magnificent piece. Partial quote below:

I understand that this strange thing happens to each billionaire in his time. He, the billionaire, looks over his works and feels incomplete.
Ozymandias syndrome?

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:16 pm

Schultz's campaign claims to be about "uniting the country."

He thinks America will come together to reject both Trump's racism and the Dems' dream of universal healthcare in order to protect billionaires from higher taxes.

Fuck this guy. I was just about to spend a semester grading at Starbucks, but that sure ain't happening.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:32 pm

Holman wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:16 pm Fuck this guy. I was just about to spend a semester grading at Starbucks, but that sure ain't happening.

He's currently Chairman Emeritus, having retired as Executive Chairman last summer, FWIW.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:16 pm

Isgrimnur wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:32 pm
Holman wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:16 pm Fuck this guy. I was just about to spend a semester grading at Starbucks, but that sure ain't happening.
He's currently Chairman Emeritus, having retired as Executive Chairman last summer, FWIW.

He's a major shareholder, and presumably the other major shareholders can put pressure on him.

It's also his life's work. I wonder if he wants to see that go into the toilet just so everyone can hate him for his arrogance.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:20 pm

You think Starbucks is going to go into the toilet if he runs?

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:24 pm

William Weld, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts who was the Libertarian Party's nominee for vice president in 2016, is mulling a run for president and could make an announcement about a possible presidential run as soon as Thursday.

The news was first reported by WCVB's On The Record co-anchor Janet Wu, who has learned any possible run would be made as a Republican.

https://www.wcvb.com/article/former-mas ... t/26092546

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:48 pm

GreenGoo wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:20 pm You think Starbucks is going to go into the toilet if he runs?

Middle-aged and young liberals intentionally quitting Starbucks could have a huge effect on the company's profits. It's a distributed retail business; margins are slim and volume is absolutely everything.

There is already talk of a boycott. We're early in the campaign season, so if Schultz tries to force his claim then he could easily start to trash his legacy. (At which point interested parties with more influence than you or me step in to kick his arrogant ass. And that's the point of the pressure.)

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:08 pm

I admire your optimism.

We're not even sure drumpf can be defeated in 2020 but you're sure you can bring low a multi-billion dollar corporation that millions of Americans pour money into through the power of staying away because dems are unhappy with a major shareholder.

How's that chik-fil-a boycott going?

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:36 pm

Defiant wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:24 pm
William Weld, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts who was the Libertarian Party's nominee for vice president in 2016, is mulling a run for president and could make an announcement about a possible presidential run as soon as Thursday.

The news was first reported by WCVB's On The Record co-anchor Janet Wu, who has learned any possible run would be made as a Republican.
https://www.wcvb.com/article/former-mas ... t/26092546

Weld is a country club Republican and a bit of a milquetoast, not a confrontational sort of person. I have a hard time imagining him going head-to-head with the blowhard in chief. He also declared himself a Libertarian forever when he was their vp candidate. I'm sure rational Republicans would welcome someone to get behind, but IDK if Weld is that guy.

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:00 am

Kraken wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:36 pm
Defiant wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:24 pm
William Weld, the former Republican governor of Massachusetts who was the Libertarian Party's nominee for vice president in 2016, is mulling a run for president and could make an announcement about a possible presidential run as soon as Thursday.

The news was first reported by WCVB's On The Record co-anchor Janet Wu, who has learned any possible run would be made as a Republican.
https://www.wcvb.com/article/former-mas ... t/26092546
Weld is a country club Republican and a bit of a milquetoast, not a confrontational sort of person. I have a hard time imagining him going head-to-head with the blowhard in chief. He also declared himself a Libertarian forever when he was their vp candidate. I'm sure rational Republicans would welcome someone to get behind, but IDK if Weld is that guy.

Larry Hogan or John Kasich are probably the best Republicans to get behind, but they may have the milquetoast issue Weld has.

I would like to see Hogan run.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 1:11 am

Kraken wrote: Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:36 pm

Weld is a country club Republican and a bit of a milquetoast, not a confrontational sort of person. I have a hard time imagining him going head-to-head with the blowhard in chief. He also declared himself a Libertarian forever when he was their vp candidate. I'm sure rational Republicans would welcome someone to get behind, but IDK if Weld is that guy.

I don't imagine he could win (unless Republicans have turned on Trump, but so quickly no one else bothered to run), but it would be pretty embarrassing if he captures, say, a third of the vote.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:05 am

I just hope somebody has the fortitude to primary Trump. Just giving rational Republicans someone to rally around would be a win.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:15 am

I would guess that Weld would run for the LIbertarian Party nomination, which he would have a good shot at. He's not going anywhere in a Republican primary.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:32 am

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:15 am I would guess that Weld would run for the LIbertarian Party nomination, which he would have a good shot at. He's not going anywhere in a Republican primary.

No, I wouldn't think he would run for that nomination. Remember he was the Libertarian VP candidate that pretty much endorsed Hillary Clinton and warned against Trump getting elected. The last thing he wants is to possibly help Trump.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:42 am

Defiant wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:32 am
El Guapo wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:15 am I would guess that Weld would run for the LIbertarian Party nomination, which he would have a good shot at. He's not going anywhere in a Republican primary.
No, I wouldn't think he would run for that nomination. Remember he was the Libertarian VP candidate that pretty much endorsed Hillary Clinton and warned against Trump getting elected. The last thing he wants is to possibly help Trump.

He also ran in the first place, and said that he was a libertarian for life.

I suppose he's ultimately spinning his wheels regardless, but running in the primary seems like an even bigger waste of his time.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:46 am

pr0ner wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:00 am I would like to see Hogan run.

Larry or Hulk?

pr0ner · Post by **pr0ner** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:47 am

Unagi wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:46 am
pr0ner wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:00 am I would like to see Hogan run.
Larry or Hulk?

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:51 am

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:42 am
He also ran in the first place, and said that he was a libertarian for life.

Before Trump was chosen as the nominee. Oh, and a politician promised something for life, you say?

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 2:55 am

https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1091492429004505089

The Shultz campaign is off to a great start.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:44 am

I read that Medium piece last night - it also indicated that Schultz throws the election to Trump against nearly every candidate except Biden. Well percentage wise which is a dicey metric. But the EC.... Anyway, sometimes the first take is accurate - looks like it might be the case here with everyone thinking he'd split the anti-Trump vote.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 02, 2019 8:50 am

Kraken wrote: Thu Jan 31, 2019 3:05 am I just hope somebody has the fortitude to primary Trump. Just giving rational Republicans someone to rally around would be a win.

Given Trump's inside-party favorability, it would be political suicide to try to primary him.

It's political suicide even to complain about him. The only Republicans who've even halfway dared have done so when retiring from office.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:49 pm

Elizabeth Warren listed herself as Native American on her Texas Bar Registration.

Warren really needs to just give up on any plans to run in 2020. She's made herself a laughing stock by stooping to Trump's level instead of just ignoring him. Now every time something like this comes up, she diminishes herself even more. She's got zero chance of winning against him. Step aside so you don't ruin the chances of someone with better odds.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:53 pm

Run baby, run! Covfefe!

Chrisoc13 · Post by **Chrisoc13** » Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:59 pm

hepcat wrote: Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:49 pm Elizabeth Warren listed herself as Native American on her Texas Bar Registration.

Warren really needs to just give up on any plans to run in 2020. She's made herself a laughing stock by stooping to Trump's level instead of just ignoring him. Now every time something like this comes up, she diminishes herself even more. She's got zero chance of winning against him. Step aside so you don't ruin the chances of someone with better odds.

Honestly I think she never had a chance to begin with, so this is probably just going to help get her out of the way so someone else can make a run at it.

But yeah, this isn't going to go away and it's going to torpedo her chances.