Octopus Overlords

Boring is not bad. Boring in terms of a tame personal life would be an asset. He doesn't have to be a massive orator, just get the job done.

They key for Dems is to make a case to the working class folks they lost in the rust belt. Start there.

Zarathud wrote:I think Warren has to do two parts -- (1) build the case against Trump being unfit and a disaster as President and (2) build a personal connection to voters as their champion and better suited than Trump to represent their interests. Democrats need to hear (1), Independents and Persuadables need to hear (2).

Deplorables are a lost cause unless Trump quickly ruins the economy in a trade war.

message 1 will drown message 2.
1 will make the election about Trump. See 2016 to see how making the election about Trump works out.
People attracted by 1 will accept 2 even if they have to do it without same sense of inevitability they believed 1 would get them this election.

It's way too late now but I still believe if Clinton would have ignored Trump the way Trump ignored her and made her entire election about the Supreme Court (much the way Trump did) the day Sanders conceded that she would be in the Whitehouse in January irrespective of the way her support was botching her optics with inevitability and entitlement.

Newcastle wrote:

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:Maybe Corey Booker? I thought his convention speech was pretty good and seemed to get the crowd energized.

Been thinking who could lead the Dems and be the candidate in 2020 ....will add to this as a i think of em.

1- Bernie - he's only 67, so say 71 at this time. Still young enough to be president. Bet he's planning his run already. And he could win. I'd almost say odds on favorite now...

2. Kamala Harris - new senator from CA. I'd say a rising star. She took on the big banks here and won. Problem is she's from Cali...

3. Tom Udall - Senator from NM. Moderate I'd say. 68 now, so 72 in 4 year...i just like him.

4. Tim Kaine - being the VP selection opens the door for him.

Not sure who else is out there. Just took a peak at the governor's list and none struck me as presidential. We'll see.

I kind of think we need a Californian (or at least West Coast) President. I don't see any way Harris could run in 2020 however. Far too inexperienced, even with a couple of Senate years under her belt. Ditto for Gavin Newsom if he wins the Governorship in 2018. Villaraigosa could run, but I don't see him ever winning.

I think Kaine may be the most likely choice. Very much the opposite of Trump which would play well.

I could also see Biden or Michelle changing their minds.

Newcastle wrote:Boring is not bad. Boring in terms of a tame personal life would be an asset. He doesn't have to be a massive orator, just get the job done.

They key for Dems is to make a case to the working class folks they lost in the rust belt. Start there.

They didn't lose them, Trump got the same or less votes as McCain and Romney. Effectively, nothing changed there. She just didn't inspire Obama voters (to the tune of 6-10 million voters).

Al Franken in 2020.

This election just reinforces my belief that presidential elections are about charisma not policy. The knock on Al has always been his past shenanigans on SNL but I think Trump has proven that skeletons in the closet no longer matter.

Exodor wrote:Al Franken in 2020.

This election just reinforces my belief that presidential elections are about charisma not policy. The knock on Al has always been his past shenanigans on SNL but I think Trump has proven that skeletons in the closet no longer matter.

Jerry Springer has political experience too, you know.

Just sayin'.

Pyperkub wrote:I think Kaine may be the most likely choice. Very much the opposite of Trump which would play well.

I could also see Biden or Michelle changing their minds.

Joe is too old, he's 73 now. Michelle is definitely not interested. Kaine would be a good choice though, I think.

But here's what I think the Demos need - a good general to run. A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

John Stewart

Here's a brutal assessment of the state of the Democratic Party right now, and it's not good:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/ ... ile-rubble

Oprah Winfrey

Grifman wrote: A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

The right was able to support Donald fucking Trump of all people. Attacking a military man would be easy as pie by comparison.

Henry Cuellar

Defiant wrote:

Grifman wrote: A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

The right was able to support Donald fucking Trump of all people. Attacking a military man would be easy as pie by comparison.

Supporting is different from attacking. Trump could make one of stupid comments about ISIS and the general would say, "While you got a draft deferment and screwed woman during Vietnam, I was fighting the Taliban, Al Quada, ISIS, etc". He could absolutely nail Trump to the wall on his POW comments. Trump would not do well against a military leader, IMO.

Grifman wrote: A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

He's a little green, but down the road, someone like Seth Moulton might do nicely.

Lisa Simpson.

Grifman wrote:
But here's what I think the Demos need - a good general to run. A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

You mean like Kerry? There's nobody that can't be swift boated.

gbasden wrote:

Grifman wrote:
But here's what I think the Demos need - a good general to run. A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

You mean like Kerry? There's nobody that can't be swift boated.

Kerry? A good military man?

Tammy Duckworth

Rip wrote:

gbasden wrote:

Grifman wrote:
But here's what I think the Demos need - a good general to run. A good military man would be hard to attack in many ways.

You mean like Kerry? There's nobody that can't be swift boated.

Kerry? A good military man?

Precisely my point. He served with valor and won a silver star. But because he protested against the war he was vulnerable to being slimed. And there you go proving the theorem.

Oh, and I hear Colin Powell isn't too happy with the R's right now. I can't wait to hear how they are going to start tearing him down.

SuperHiro wrote:Tammy Duckworth

Tammy got slammed in political ads in Illinois for supposedly enabling/not doing anything about the problems with the VA. She's also in a lot of pictures with Rod Blagojevich.

Victoria Raverna wrote:Lisa Simpson.

+1

Biden Says He’s Running in 2020

Vice President Joe Biden told a small group of reporters Monday night that he planned on running for president in 2020. “Yeah, I am. I am going to run in 2020.”

Moliere wrote:Biden Says He’s Running in 2020

Vice President Joe Biden told a small group of reporters Monday night that he planned on running for president in 2020. “Yeah, I am. I am going to run in 2020.”

It's good to see how the Democrats are retooling with exciting new leadership...

Oh wait. Fuck.

Boomers are experts at running their kid's lives ... why should that change?

I love Biden, so I would vote for him in a heartbeat. His age would definitely be an issue, though. On the other hand, Obama's already popular, and is likely to get more popular as he gets more removed from day-to-day politics and partisanship. Biden would probably get a big boost from Obama nostalgia.

We'll see who else emerges. Of course, barring some bizarre turn of events, it's not like I'm going to seriously consider anyone but the democratic nominee in the general, unless there is a sudden change in favor of pro-third party voting rules, or unless the democrats nominate the exhumed corpse of Fidel Castro.

Cory Booker 2020.

Obama 2020.

Isgrimnur wrote:Cory Booker 2020.

I think anyone from NJ is tainted and his tenure as mayor of Newark is shaky at best.

Obama*/Clinton^ 2020!


*Michelle

^Chelsea

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:Obama*/Clinton^ 2020!


*Michelle

^Chelsea

I was going for Michelle above.

malchior wrote:

Isgrimnur wrote:Cory Booker 2020.

I think anyone from NJ is tainted and his tenure as mayor of Newark is shaky at best.

I want to like him. But I've always found there to be something schmoozy, forced, and inauthentic about Booker.

In my mind, what's consistent across the election of recent presidents is the perception of authenticity... Bill Clinton and Obama won with it, Gore, Kerry, and Hillary lost without it. For the GOP, Trump, and W. also we're perceived that way by many despite their innumerable faults. Bush senior not as much, but he was running against Dukakis, who was even worse in that respect (e.g., his answer to the infamous rape question, him in the tank, etc).

So please, Democrats, no more stilted "Trumped Up Trickle Down" lame ass slogans and poll-tested phrasing. That stuff doesn't seem to fly anymore.

Captain Caveman wrote:

malchior wrote:

Isgrimnur wrote:Cory Booker 2020.

I think anyone from NJ is tainted and his tenure as mayor of Newark is shaky at best.

I want to like him. But I've always found there to be something schmoozy, forced, and inauthentic about Booker.

I have personally seen him speak twice - he approaches Obama-level good at a podium and he is whip smart but I do agree that he can appear inauthentic. Especially on tv.

Booker's alright. I would need to read up more on him, but he has potential.

I also assume that Warren is a lock to run in 2020, unless she is just fundamentally uninterested in being president or unless something dramatic happens over the next few years.

Somewhat related to that, if Sanders himself doesn't run again (which I think he might, notwithstanding his age), someone else from the Sanders wing will run. That could plausibly include Warren, though I'm not sure that she's radical enough for many of the Sanders folk.

Warren/Van Jones?

I would enjoy seeing more Van Jones. I think he gets it, and won't put up with crap.

I'm surprised that Biden is throwing his hat in the ring already. Hasn't he learned that nothing good comes of giving the Republicans an entire 4 years to mount a smear campaign?

If the donkeys continue to be led by dinosaurs, I foresee another bingo card in the offing as the geezers make one last gasp for glory and a bunch of younger people vie to at least gain name recognition. I think another Obama or Clinton (Bill) - type candidate will emerge...someone not well known right now, not too many skeletons in the closet, and not too many years of elephantine lies.

Now, Trump may yet "drain the swamp" by taking down every remora that attached itself to his YUGE posterior. If Paul Ryan maintains a modicum of adversity, he probably becomes the front runner. Who else is resisting the urge to jump on the bandwagon and protect their chances for 2020? Anyone with potentially broader appeal than Ryan? Typically, the ruling party stands unified with their president and there isn't a primary challenge -- has a sitting president ever gone lame duck in the primaries (except by choice) after one term?

Jeff V wrote:I'm surprised that Biden is throwing his hat in the ring already. Hasn't he learned that nothing good comes of giving the Republicans an entire 4 years to mount a smear campaign?

Maybe I'm a cynical bastard, but I took this admission as proof that he wanted to run in 2016 but the establishment already decided on Hillary. And because he's a team player, he remained quiet - unlike Bernie Sanders who built an entire campaign on the idea that the people should be choosing, not something pre-determined by the party (which was pretty clearly the case for Hillary). Biden might not actually even run, but I think he wanted it out there (officially) that he's interested.

Smoove_B wrote:Maybe I'm a cynical bastard, but I took this admission as proof that he wanted to run in 2016 but the establishment already decided on Hillary.

That's the immediate subtext that slapped me in the face, but that's probably more me reading frustration at the election than it is reality.

The second subtext I took is that Clinton will finally go gracefully into that night, and again that's more me reading hope than it has any link to reality.

Jeff V wrote:I'm surprised that Biden is throwing his hat in the ring already. Hasn't he learned that nothing good comes of giving the Republicans an entire 4 years to mount a smear campaign?

If the donkeys continue to be led by dinosaurs, I foresee another bingo card in the offing as the geezers make one last gasp for glory and a bunch of younger people vie to at least gain name recognition. I think another Obama or Clinton (Bill) - type candidate will emerge...someone not well known right now, not too many skeletons in the closet, and not too many years of elephantine lies.

Now, Trump may yet "drain the swamp" by taking down every remora that attached itself to his YUGE posterior. If Paul Ryan maintains a modicum of adversity, he probably becomes the front runner. Who else is resisting the urge to jump on the bandwagon and protect their chances for 2020? Anyone with potentially broader appeal than Ryan? Typically, the ruling party stands unified with their president and there isn't a primary challenge -- has a sitting president ever gone lame duck in the primaries (except by choice) after one term?

Not quite one term, but I think both Truman (in '52) and Johnson (in '68) toyed with getting elected to President for a second time, but dropped out early on, IIRC.