Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

Yep. While the lazy will still get their info via meme, even the most slightly curious will find this stuff and be better informed. I feel like most people who frequent P&R would benefit from this stuff.

Even better would be a unbiased website where you plug in your earnings and see where you fall under all candidates plans. 

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment

Bernie, leads the traditional candidates (non-self funding)  in money going into this important stretch.    Warren got a boast from the debate. 

We'll see who will drop out of the race after super Tuesday.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democratic-presidential-candidates-ended-january-short-on-cash-11582281001

Quote

 

Four of the top six Democratic presidential campaigns spent heavily ahead of the Iowa caucuses, and they are now at a major disadvantage on the airwaves heading into next month’s crucial Super Tuesday contests.

While billionaire Michael Bloomberg is already spending about $156 million on TV and radio ads across the 14 states that weigh in on March 3, neither former Vice President Joe Biden nor former Mayor Pete Buttigieg had invested in a single Super Tuesday commercial as of Thursday night, according to ad tracker Kantar/CMAG.

Sens. Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren combined have put less than $2 million into Super Tuesday ads. Of the six candidates in Wednesday’s Democratic debate, Sen. Bernie Sanders is the only nonbillionaire with a major paid-media presence in those states, with $11 million in ads.

Federal Election Commission reports filed late Thursday, which cover finance activity in the month of January, help explain the absence of paid media for much of the 2020 Democratic field: As February began, Mr. Biden, Mr. Buttigieg, Ms. Klobuchar and Ms. Warren each had less than half as much in the bank as Mr. Sanders did. And none had a war chest close to the $460 million Mr. Bloomberg, the former New York mayor, had put into his campaign by the end of last month.

The disparity shows how 2020 Democrats poured resources into the four states that vote in February and how the race could be shaken up as it moves to the March states where Mr. Bloomberg has been spending aggressively for months. Billionaire Tom Steyer, another presidential self-funder, also has paid for some $37 million of ads on TV in Super Tuesday states.

 

 

Link to comment

On 2/20/2020 at 7:55 AM, TGHusker said:

give it a whirl my friend - I'm all ears.

 

 

17 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

You do as an individual. 

 

The polls, as a collective have an idea that is different than your individual idea.

 

As I said, good luck with your individual idea.  I'll go with the polls which are more than just a single persons opinion.

 

Sorry, I've been deathly sick the last 24 hours and haven't been able to do much of anything. But I'm feeling a bit better today and off work, so here goes:

 

@BlitzFirst if you prefer polls, chew this one over:

 

Sanders advantage evaporates in swing states. He undoubtedly does better in the Rust Belt, but he absolutely cannot compete in other purple or light-red swing states. Meaning AZ, FL, GA, NC are all out of play. These are all places that are shifting blue at differing paces (other than FL, where 2 years ago a Bernie acolyte tried to run his playbook and lost). But running a guy who fancies himself any form of the word socialist is simply going to tank our chances in these states and hurt downballot Dems running for Congress.

 

I do think he could win MI. But as someone mentioned in the debate, once blue-collar Pennsylvanians find out his position calling for a total ban on fracking (a backbone of their economy), he's going to be dead in the water there. He's going to have to actually moderate his positions (gasp!) or come up with an argument that's a hell of a lot better than "the scientists say." That was a horrible answer even if he's correct. Not all that different from Clinton's "we're going to put coal miners out of business" quote.

 

And as for WI here's the latest Quinnipiac swing state poll:

 

 

WTH? How is WI trending this red?

 

In short, my problem with Sanders is he creates for himself an extremely narrow map to victory. I think he pretty much has to win WI/PA/MI and all the other states Clinton won to win. Those states I listed first are just off the table altogether. And it's not like once he wins the nomination the next six months occur in a vacuum. He will no longer be playing in the minors, it will be Bernie vs. Trump 24/7. The GOP slime machine will be cranking overdrive on him. And once the discussion becomes how President Sanders doesn't tank the economy or put a bunch of people out of work or nationalize everything - believe me, that is the discussion Trump and others will try to force him to have - I think a lot of people get a lot more nervous about voting for him and opt to re-elect the doofus we have, with all his horrible flaws, because he's the devil we know.

 

The past four+ years have turned me into a cynical old man regarding our politics, but I'm calling my shot now: This guy will get his butt kicked in a general election.

 

And believe me, I'd love to come back and eat crow on this. It's not like I want him to lose by any means. I just think he will.

  • Plus1 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

 

Sorry, I've been deathly sick the last 24 hours and haven't been able to do much of anything. But I'm feeling a bit better today and off work, so here goes:

 

@BlitzFirst if you prefer polls, chew this one over:

 

Sanders advantage evaporates in swing states. He undoubtedly does better in the Rust Belt, but he absolutely cannot compete in other purple or light-red swing states. Meaning AZ, FL, GA, NC are all out of play. These are all places that are shifting blue at differing paces (other than FL, where 2 years ago a Bernie acolyte tried to run his playbook and lost). But running a guy who fancies himself any form of the word socialist is simply going to tank our chances in these states and hurt downballot Dems running for Congress.

 

I do think he could win MI. But as someone mentioned in the debate, once blue-collar Pennsylvanians find out his position calling for a total ban on fracking (a backbone of their economy), he's going to be dead in the water there. He's going to have to actually moderate his positions (gasp!) or come up with an argument that's a hell of a lot better than "the scientists say." That was a horrible answer even if he's correct. Not all that different from Clinton's "we're going to put coal miners out of business" quote.

 

And as for WI here's the latest Quinnipiac swing state poll:

 

 

WTH? How is WI trending this red?

 

In short, my problem with Sanders is he creates for himself an extremely narrow map to victory. I think he pretty much has to win WI/PA/MI and all the other states Clinton won to win. Those states I listed first are just off the table altogether. And it's not like once he wins the nomination the next six months occur in a vacuum. He will no longer be playing in the minors, it will be Bernie vs. Trump 24/7. The GOP slime machine will be cranking overdrive on him. And once the discussion becomes how President Sanders doesn't tank the economy or put a bunch of people out of work or nationalize everything - believe me, that is the discussion Trump and others will try to force him to have - I think a lot of people get a lot more nervous about voting for him and opt to re-elect the doofus we have, with all his horrible flaws, because he's the devil we know.

 

The past four+ years have turned me into a cynical old man regarding our politics, but I'm calling my shot now: This guy will get his butt kicked in a general election.

 

And believe me, I'd love to come back and eat crow on this. It's not like I want him to lose by any means. I just think he will.

This is why my vote is either Biden or Amy.  I'll vote for Warren also - actually I'm not voting for Trump so the Dems could put  Dudley Doright on the ticket and I'll vote for the candidate.  But the bigger picture is that the candidate must win those states you note above.

I don't understand Wisc above as they kicked Walker out of office in 2018. 

Biden needs to get his act together.  His pooooor performance is hurting the Dems chances.  If Biden heads the ticket he needs a very capable VP choice.

Link to comment

Hey @Danny BatemanI like your reasoning with Bernie.   How much would that change, when he announces his running mate (assuming he wins the nomination)?   Personally, whomever gets the nod, I'd love to see Val Demings get the nod for VP.  I think she would help with the Law & Order crowd, minority and female voters, and I think she would be critical for the state of FL.   Also, I think FL will be lean blue for the next few elections, even with Bernie, based on the change on felony voting rights changing.   I think most of those voters lean Dems, which IMO moves FL from purple to blue.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

Biden needs to get his act together.  His pooooor performance is hurting the Dems chances.  If Biden heads the ticket he needs a very capable VP choice.

 

 

Biden shouldn't head a ticket, and you shouldn't want him to, as that would hurt the country. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
20 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

In short, my problem with Sanders is he creates for himself an extremely narrow map to victory. I think he pretty much has to win WI/PA/MI and all the other states Clinton won to win. Those states I listed first are just off the table altogether. And it's not like once he wins the nomination the next six months occur in a vacuum. He will no longer be playing in the minors, it will be Bernie vs. Trump 24/7. The GOP slime machine will be cranking overdrive on him. And once the discussion becomes how President Sanders doesn't tank the economy or put a bunch of people out of work or nationalize everything - believe me, that is the discussion Trump and others will try to force him to have - I think a lot of people get a lot more nervous about voting for him and opt to re-elect the doofus we have, with all his horrible flaws, because he's the devil we know.

 

The past four+ years have turned me into a cynical old man regarding our politics, but I'm calling my shot now: This guy will get his butt kicked in a general election.

 

And believe me, I'd love to come back and eat crow on this. It's not like I want him to lose by any means. I just think he will.

This scares the heck out of me too. I like Bernie, but despite what polls say now, I don’t think he can win. I still maintain only Biden and Bloomberg. Although the other candidates are doing their best to paint Bloomberg as a Democratic Trump. 

Link to comment

12 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

Biden shouldn't head a ticket, and you shouldn't want him to, as that would hurt the country. 

 

I think this is overblown. Diamond Joe is not great in debates, and has a tendency to say some really goofy stuff on the campaign trail, but neither of those have anything to do with actually doing the job.

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

 

Sorry, I've been deathly sick the last 24 hours and haven't been able to do much of anything. But I'm feeling a bit better today and off work, so here goes:

 

@BlitzFirst if you prefer polls, chew this one over:

 

Sanders advantage evaporates in swing states. He undoubtedly does better in the Rust Belt, but he absolutely cannot compete in other purple or light-red swing states. Meaning AZ, FL, GA, NC are all out of play. These are all places that are shifting blue at differing paces (other than FL, where 2 years ago a Bernie acolyte tried to run his playbook and lost). But running a guy who fancies himself any form of the word socialist is simply going to tank our chances in these states and hurt downballot Dems running for Congress.

 

I do think he could win MI. But as someone mentioned in the debate, once blue-collar Pennsylvanians find out his position calling for a total ban on fracking (a backbone of their economy), he's going to be dead in the water there. He's going to have to actually moderate his positions (gasp!) or come up with an argument that's a hell of a lot better than "the scientists say." That was a horrible answer even if he's correct. Not all that different from Clinton's "we're going to put coal miners out of business" quote.

 

And as for WI here's the latest Quinnipiac swing state poll:

 

 

WTH? How is WI trending this red?

 

In short, my problem with Sanders is he creates for himself an extremely narrow map to victory. I think he pretty much has to win WI/PA/MI and all the other states Clinton won to win. Those states I listed first are just off the table altogether. And it's not like once he wins the nomination the next six months occur in a vacuum. He will no longer be playing in the minors, it will be Bernie vs. Trump 24/7. The GOP slime machine will be cranking overdrive on him. And once the discussion becomes how President Sanders doesn't tank the economy or put a bunch of people out of work or nationalize everything - believe me, that is the discussion Trump and others will try to force him to have - I think a lot of people get a lot more nervous about voting for him and opt to re-elect the doofus we have, with all his horrible flaws, because he's the devil we know.

 

The past four+ years have turned me into a cynical old man regarding our politics, but I'm calling my shot now: This guy will get his butt kicked in a general election.

 

And believe me, I'd love to come back and eat crow on this. It's not like I want him to lose by any means. I just think he will.

Damn Wisconsin, they don't want no females running this country. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, sho said:

Hey @Danny BatemanI like your reasoning with Bernie.   How much would that change, when he announces his running mate (assuming he wins the nomination)?   Personally, whomever gets the nod, I'd love to see Val Demings get the nod for VP.  I think she would help with the Law & Order crowd, minority and female voters, and I think she would be critical for the state of FL.   Also, I think FL will be lean blue for the next few elections, even with Bernie, based on the change on felony voting rights changing.   I think most of those voters lean Dems, which IMO moves FL from purple to blue.

 

I think someone like Demings would help. A lot of Bernie's core supporters seem to think he's going to pick someone who's ideologically the same as him. The two most common names I've heard have been Tulsi or Nina Turner, an ex-state senator from OH who was a surrogate for him in 2016 and a national co-chair of his campaign. Or even a progressive unity ticket with Warren.

 

IMO if Bernie wins he should run the campaign he wants to, but traditionally a VP balances the ticket instead of doubling up with another anti-establishment figure or leftist.

 

Don't get me wrong - I'll happily vote for the Dem ticket no matter who wins and will even try to find some time to canvass for them since we're moving to Michigan in the late summer or early fall. It will be nuts to live in a place where I feel like my vote actually matters! I'm just a lot more skeptical of Sanders' chances to win than some others.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...