Biden Mittens 2020!: More Bad Advice From Centrists

[Skroe]

Yeah this is a terrible idea. If you sided with Trump, there is no forgiveness. No second chances.

Romney took a brave stand in the 2016 election. He repeatedly and loudly denounced Trump. He did the right thing.

Then Trump won, and Romney allowed Trump to stick his tiny mushroom-shaped orange cock into him.

A "national unity ticket" is a noble idea. But not Mitt Romney. Not anyone who ever made peace with Trump.

Not that Trump will make it to 2020, but if Democrats want to win, the top of the ticket should be an experienced centrist Democratic figure.. probably in their 60 or 70s, White and Male and able to speak to the working class and with "executive experience". His running mate should be a younger figure... probably in their 40s. Probably a minority, biracial and/or female. This person would be anointed by Saint Bernie as the progressive standard bearer, and would speak to younger people and the growing diversity of the Democratic Party.

Ideally for the party's sale, the candidate at the top of the ticket would only serve one term, and make room for the Vice President to run for President in 2024.

Here's the Democrats problem... and it's the same problem that Republicans faced back in 2011 (just before the 2012 election). In 2008, both Hillary and Obama had an enormous bench of talent to draw on, because the Clinton Machine and DNC had spent around the years 1996 to 2008 building it. Similarly, the Republican Party in 1999 had a huge bench of talent to draw from that it had been cultivating since the 1980s.

But you get to 2011? Bush looted and pillaged the Republican bench, and his administration tainted so many careers, it let the tea party and the other crazies walk right in. Recall how many losers and charlatans were on the stage in 2012 at the Republican Primary. It only served to make Romney unconvincingly say crazy things.

The Democratic Party in 2016 and 2019 is in much the same spot. The Obama years looted and pillaged the Democratic bench to staff the administration, and did very little to build the bench like the Clinton Administration did. In fact, the DNC had a rather hostile relationship with Obama's faction for just this reason. The most important political job for President Hillary Clinton for her party was going to be standing up a new generation of Democrats ready for prominent positions, including high office one day.

Now the next Democrat will have to do that, and the pickings are thin. Between the Octegenarians who rule the House, the Governors without National Appeal, and Obama's team scooping up the next-gen talent without replentishing it... there is like a big hole of ready-to-lead Democrats in their 40s and early 50s who aren't Senators.

This entire thing I've described... it's nothing new. It's happened before. But it takes a good 15 years to reboot the parties. Democrats will have to do it in about a total of six years. Not easy.

[Redwyrm]

The funny thing is, the only attack the Republicans had against Joe Biden was that he occasionally made gaffes while speaking. Would love to see them throw that stone now.

[JohnBrown1917]

Clinton lost because she was too far too the right, why go even further?
Trump is not even the worst republicans, working with them is a mistake.

- - - Updated - - -

This, his time to run was two years ago. He'd be 82 going into a second term if he runs and wins in 2020.

The notion of a bi partisan ticket of two moderates is a great idea, finding actual viable candidates is the issue.

Maybe if it was 2 dems, but we know what happened to Clinton, hardly seems itll work.

[Slybak]

And I'm sure this lady "recommend" Palin. Some one who single handedly sunk the tea party movement with her ineptitude. Of biden runs on the dems side. Of the GoP somehow decides to run trump. Biden will sink trump with ease.

The one who recommended Palin to McCain was Bill Kristol. So... yeah. Beating Trump depends less on the candidate and more on the underlying campaign apparatus not being the hot mess that it was in 2016.

- - - Updated - - -

TThe notion of a bi partisan ticket of two moderates is a great idea

No it isn't. There is no constituency for this, and even if there was there's still no institutional capacity to make that constituency an electoral force. And even if there was, such an administration would hit Macron-level approval ratings within two years. People want things from politics. A "Unity" ticket offers nothing but empty pablum.

- - - Updated - - -

The Democratic Party in 2016 and 2019 is in much the same spot. The Obama years looted and pillaged the Democratic bench to staff the administration, and did very little to build the bench like the Clinton Administration did.

None of the popular candidates for the forthcoming Democratic nomination were cultivated by the Clinton machine. Further, no one was "pillaged" from the front bench by Obama. Unless you're really hankering for a Tom Vilsack or a Kathleen Sebelius Presidency, and if that's the case I'm sorry to say your advice should be ignored.

[cubby]

Juleanna Glover has worked as an adviser for several Republican politicians, including George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Rudy Giuliani and advised the presidential campaigns of John McCain and Jeb Bush. She is on the Biden Institute Policy Advisory Board.

Uh huh.

Yep, they are just trying to find some ballast to hold onto while their ship sinks around them. Hysterical.

The ticket should be Beto/Harris, and fuck the GOP. The Dems will own the entire government, and fix all the shit the GOP has fucked up. Again.

[Northern Goblin]

The ticket should be Beto/Harris,

A guy who couldn't beat Ted Cruz and a woman who's appeal would only attract safe coastal states, but is the exact type of California "elite" that middle America would be put off by?

Stop thinking of tickets that will win over Democrat voters that were never going to vote anything else, and start thinking of tickets that will lure people away from voting Republican.

Hillary didn't lose because she was too far to the right, she's no further right than Obama. She just had way too much baggage for people, and the primaries left a sour taste in their mouths.

This is why the Democrats aren't winning in 2020, they won't budge from their idealism one inch, because compromise is apparently now captitulation rather than showing political savvy and leadership. Rather than showing they're better than Republicans they want to emulate them.

Problem is in this day and age, conservatism will win outright, no matter how popular you think you are. See last year's British GE.

[kaelleria]

I'd like everyone over the age of 60 just to fuck right out of the Democratic primary tbh... Especially Bernie.

[JohnBrown1917]

I'd like everyone over the age of 60 just to fuck right out of the Democratic primary tbh... Especially Bernie.

Getting rid of one of the more popular politicians.. that really makes sense.

[JohnBrown1917]

A guy who couldn't beat Ted Cruz and a woman who's appeal would only attract safe coastal states, but is the exact type of California "elite" that middle America would be put off by?

Stop thinking of tickets that will win over Democrat voters that were never going to vote anything else, and start thinking of tickets that will lure people away from voting Republican.

Hillary didn't lose because she was too far to the right, she's no further right than Obama. She just had way too much baggage for people, and the primaries left a sour taste in their mouths.

This is why the Democrats aren't winning in 2020, they won't budge from their idealism one inch, because compromise is apparently now captitulation rather than showing political savvy and leadership. Rather than showing they're better than Republicans they want to emulate them.

Problem is in this day and age, conservatism will win outright, no matter how popular you think you are. See last year's British GE.

They will never get repblican voters, going even further right won't solve anything. A ton of people did not vote, go after those.

- - - Updated - - -

And people voted for Trump, so that is clearly not the case.

Republicans have a rather stable voting base, so they will do so again in 2020, they really need somebody that appeals to all the voters that feel left out(and the answer is not the middle of the 2 parties, they are too close for that on economic issues).

[kaelleria]

Getting rid of one of the more popular politicians.. that really makes sense.

I think you underestimate how much a lot of people feel he played spoiler in the last election. He's actually been getting creamed in polls recently. He's also too old. So is Biden.

If he got the nomination I'd support him because I'm not an idiot, but I will absolutely not support someone who isn't even a democrat in the primary.

[JohnBrown1917]

I think you underestimate how much a lot of people feel he played spoiler in the last election. He's actually been getting creamed in polls recently. He's also too old. So is Biden.

If he got the nomination I'd support him because I'm not an idiot, but I will absolutely not support someone who isn't even a democrat in the primary.

Mostly the Clinton supporters, ye. Does not mean they have a point. if the dems put another person with Clinton's kind of campaigning and policies.. they'll lose.. again. I'm willing to bet on it.

Not to mention the important polls are how they'll do against Trump, not in the primary.. I mean, its obviously needed to win it, but not for deciding who to back if you want Trump out.

[Northern Goblin]

And people voted for Trump, so that is clearly not the case. I mean he was a person with real baggage, not made up shit like buttery males and pizzagate.

Because Trump weaponised victimhood and played up to public fears and insecurities. He ran that election being a con artist.

He didn't waste time appealing to those who'd never vote for him, and used them as a boogeyman to appeal to middle America by driving up already existing negative feelings about people on the coasts.

[cubby]

A guy who couldn't beat Ted Cruz and a woman who's appeal would only attract safe coastal states, but is the exact type of California "elite" that middle America would be put off by?

Stop thinking of tickets that will win over Democrat voters that were never going to vote anything else, and start thinking of tickets that will lure people away from voting Republican.

Hillary didn't lose because she was too far to the right, she's no further right than Obama. She just had way too much baggage for people, and the primaries left a sour taste in their mouths.

This is why the Democrats aren't winning in 2020, they won't budge from their idealism one inch, because compromise is apparently now captitulation rather than showing political savvy and leadership. Rather than showing they're better than Republicans they want to emulate them.

Problem is in this day and age, conservatism will win outright, no matter how popular you think you are. See last year's British GE.

Wow, I guess you don't know anything about Beto, at all. Please don't post in these threads without some semblance of what you're talking about. Or are you confused how a TX/CA ticket would play out across the country? Unity?

How did conservatism do in the last national elections again?

[akris15]

I have been saying I know hes not the talk of conversation for 2020 but Sherrod Brown for Democrats would devastate Trump re-election plans. Think about it an older (but not too old) old fashion labor union politician. who ironically. being from Ohio is one of the more liberal politicians. He would hit most of the populist movement ideas in regards to trade without blowing up the entire machine. Not only that since hes respected by the Kasich Republicans that would probably take away Ohio from Trump (which in the immortal words of Biden "that's a huge fucking deal") and puts a firewall on Penn and Michigan due to his labor background. This would force Trump to go all in on the immigration issues, especially if we are dealing with a recession (which I am fully expecting).

While he is very liberal by American standards you need a rock star VP if you take Brown to counter Trump. At first I wanted a firebomber to be his VP, someone who can go toe to toe with Trump and not give two shits to energize the liberals while allowing Brown's hand to be clean but I don't want someone overshadowing Brown (I want to get close without going over per se). I was thinking Harris would be good just being a pure Gadfly to Trump but the more I think about it the person should be Beto.

I am torn between what I want for VP but Brown would be the logical choice if he can get through the primaries but I am afraid Democrats, being in a crowded field, will go to the first "Trump" campaigner (ie the different, unique, shows they care although they are doing nothing but firebombing) compared to the others who are all basically a different cut of the same flavor (corporate democrat, diversity democrat, far coast democrats, democrat who are basically Republican, ect).

[Northern Goblin]

Wow, I guess you don't know anything about Beto, at all. Please don't post in these threads without some semblance of what you're talking about. Or are you confused how a TX/CA ticket would play out across the country? Unity?

I do know what I'm talking about, I'm just not living in a fantasy land where someone who couldn't defeat one of the lowest approval ratings in a state that is ever growing closer to purple, wouldn't suddenly defeat a populist in other states. Especially blue collar states where his running mate is the very coastal elite that they've had demonised to them.

Just because I don't share your wishful thinking doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about.

How did conservatism do in the last national elections again?

It won the most seats by a considerable margin of 55 seats (out of 650) over second place.

[cubby]

I do know what I'm talking about, I'm just not living in a fantasy land where someone who couldn't defeat one of the lowest approval ratings in a state that is ever growing closer to purple, wouldn't suddenly defeat a populist in other states. Especially blue collar states where his running mate is the very coastal elite that they've had demonised to them.

Just because I don't share your wishful thinking doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about.

Well, you think conservatism won out in the 2018 midterms. You'd be the only one of the planet that has that opinion. So yeah, I'm going with you still have no clue what you're talking about.

It won the most seats by a considerable margin of 55 seats (out of 650) over second place.

So conservatism won? You done now?

[Redwyrm]

It will be interesting to see if the "Republicans" (that aren't Trump sycophants) will put up any candidates to run against him.

[Gestopft]

I have been saying I know hes not the talk of conversation for 2020 but Sherrod Brown for Democrats would devastate Trump re-election plans. Think about it an older (but not too old) old fashion labor union politician. who ironically. being from Ohio is one of the more liberal politicians. He would hit most of the populist movement ideas in regards to trade without blowing up the entire machine. Not only that since hes respected by the Kasich Republicans that would probably take away Ohio from Trump (which in the immortal words of Biden "that's a huge fucking deal") and puts a firewall on Penn and Michigan due to his labor background. This would force Trump to go all in on the immigration issues, especially if we are dealing with a recession (which I am fully expecting).

Ever since he won his Senate re-election I've thought he'd be a good person to beat Trump. Union guy that can win in Ohio? That's someone that can get the Rust Belt back in 2020.

[Northern Goblin]

Well, you think conservatism won out in the 2018 midterms. You'd be the only one of the planet that has that opinion. So yeah, I'm going with you still have no clue what you're talking about.

I didn't mention the midterms, I referenced the 2017 UK General election. Perhaps if you actually read what was being said, you'd have a clue what was being talked about.

But as you mentioned them, the midterms went the way midterms tend to go when an incumbent holds both house and senate, and he kept one of them.

Obama lost mid terms in 2010, worse than Trump did this year, still won in 2012. So pointing at the midterms like they're some grand prophecy is the ultimate in fantasy wishing.

[cubby]

I didn't mention the midterms, I referenced the 2017 UK General election. Perhaps if you actually read what was being said, you'd have a clue what was being talked about.

But as you mentioned them, the midterms went the way midterms tend to go when an incumbent holds both house and senate, and he kept one of them.

Obama lost mid terms in 2010, worse than Trump did this year, still won in 2012. So pointing at the midterms like they're some grand prophecy is the ultimate in fantasy wishing.

Who fucking cares about the UK? I mean - seriously? This thread is about the United States. Should I link some Italian election information?

The midterms went the conservative way? What now? lol

You said conservatism will win out. It didn't. Own up to being wrong or just leave. I have zero tolerance for people that aren't intellectually honest.