What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Handyman said:
But is he gay enough to offset his rather Centrist military views? I am not sure the Bernie Bros will accept him unless he stops acting so straight ;)
Click to expand...

He's married to a dude. For the vast majority of republicans and a not insignificant number of democrats he's more than gay enough. The good thing is we've progressed from 10 years ago his candidacy would have been a long-shot joke and 10 years from now a dude marrying a dude won't even require a mention. If we could only make the same progress with the economic beliefs of more voters.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Handyman said:
Kepler and his group dont believe liberals in any state but California and NY matter. Liberals in Red States...they should be put in Flaggys Wal-Mart Death Camps :D
Click to expand...

The list of "swing states" that have either been won recently by Dems or had close losses that Dems need to robustly contest: PA/MI/WI/FL/NC/OH/IA/AZ/GA. They also need to put money into TX in order to help down ballot races. Its not like funding is going to be a problem.

List of states to forget about: WV, KY, TN, AK, AL, AR, MS, OK, KS, ND, SD, MT, ID, UT, WY, LA, MO, IN, SC. I left out NE because they absolutely need to go all out in the Omaha congressional district to try and grab that 1 electoral vote (Obama won it in 2008).

Chump won 306 votes last time. His party got killed in PA and MI which would bring him down to 270. Hypothetically Dems taking back 1 EV from Maine (where the GOP also got killed in 2018) and 1 from NE gets him down to 268. Every one counts.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Rover said:
The list of "swing states" that have either been won recently by Dems or had close losses that Dems need to robustly contest: PA/MI/WI/FL/NC/OH/IA/AZ/GA. They also need to put money into TX in order to help down ballot races. Its not like funding is going to be a problem.

List of states to forget about: WV, KY, TN, AK, AL, AR, MS, OK, KS, ND, SD, MT, ID, UT, WY, LA, MO, IN, SC.
Click to expand...

Move Ohio from your first list to your second one. I can't imagine there is a democrat running that will be within the margin of error when the votes are counted in November 2020. This state is lost. I don't mean it is lost to democrats, I mean it is lost. Don't be fooled by Sherrod Brown's 5 or 6 point win last November. He won because of incumbency and because the republicans did not bother trying to beat him because they are stupid. Had the party targeted the state and put funding and a viable candidate on the ballot, Brown would have been in for trouble. At best they'd still be counting the votes. I see more confederate flags here than I do in Alabama.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

WeAreNDHockey said:
Move Ohio from your first list to your second one. I can't imagine there is a democrat running that will be within the margin of error when the votes are counted in November 2020. This state is lost. I don't mean it is lost to democrats, I mean it is lost. Don't be fooled by Sherrod Brown's 5 or 6 point win last November. He won because of incumbency and because the republicans did not bother trying to beat him because they are stupid. Had the party targeted the state and put funding and a viable candidate on the ballot, Brown would have been in for trouble. At best they'd still be counting the votes. I see more confederate flags here than I do in Alabama.
Click to expand...

This. Ohio is gone. It's red. It should be dead to Democrats.
 
WeAreNDHockey said:
Move Ohio from your first list to your second one. I can't imagine there is a democrat running that will be within the margin of error when the votes are counted in November 2020. This state is lost. I don't mean it is lost to democrats, I mean it is lost. Don't be fooled by Sherrod Brown's 5 or 6 point win last November. He won because of incumbency and because the republicans did not bother trying to beat him because they are stupid. Had the party targeted the state and put funding and a viable candidate on the ballot, Brown would have been in for trouble. At best they'd still be counting the votes. I see more confederate flags here than I do in Alabama.
Click to expand...

The area south of I-70 has always been North Kentucky. The fact that it's crept north of there as the brain drain has accelerated in the last 10-15 years is no surprise at all. Ohio is quickly becoming East Indiana.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

ScoobyDoo said:
...and he has no policy ideas whatsoever.
Click to expand...

We aren't sure about that. He does seem to be waving Purple Woo right now, and he has made noises that are too far right for me, but he is mostly silent on policy.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Rover said:
Gotta agree to disagree here. You seem to be arguing for the Kerry election strategy per Bob Shrum which is to only concentrate on the bare minimum amount of states needed to win the election. Great if you run the table but not so much if you get a surprise (Ohio, in the case of that election which apparently they were counting on).

If a candidate is going to completely write off in no particular order NC, GA, FL and AZ to name a few recent wins and near misses, then not only do they give up any margin of error, but the GOP can then conserve resources to defend the states that they need. I want a nominee that can force Chump to defend NC so that it doesn't turn into VA for them, and one that can find that extra .1% of the vote in Florida that we've been losing by lately.

I'll also note that while Sanders won the MI primary, which a lot of his fans hang their hat on, he also lost the primaries in PA, OH, FL, IA, VA, NC etc etc - meaning his primary state victories didn't show a path to victory in the general election either.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing for writing off either FL or NC. That would silly. I'm arguing that we put effort into states directly to the extent that they are near 50/50. So, the most goes to to knife edge states: FL, PA, WI, MI. Then come the leaners both towards red (OH, ...) and blue (NC, ...). The safe states both red and blue you ignore.

This is only at the electoral level, of course. For fundraising you're still going to pump rich states, both red and blue. TX probably nets the Dems more money than half our blue states. And for down ticket races we devote resources where they are needed -- for House, that's regardless of statewide which is not relevant.

It's nothing personal, it's just math.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Handyman said:
Kepler and his group dont believe liberals in any state but California and NY matter. Liberals in Red States...they should be put in Flaggys Wal-Mart Death Camps :D
Click to expand...

I don't believe CA or NY liberals matter. They aren't going to change any election.

Find me somebody whose vote has heft in turning a toss-up -- that's who I care about.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Handyman said:
But is he gay enough to offset his rather Centrist military views? (and his religion)
Click to expand...

I have actually read criticism of Buttigieg that he isn't "gay enough" because he doesn't have the Broadway Mincing Affect. I assume this comes from the same sort of as-shole who complained Obama wasn't black enough because he didn't talk like DMX.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

Kepler said:
I have actually read criticism of Buttigieg that he isn't "gay enough" because he doesn't have the Broadway Mincing Affect. I assume this comes from the same sort of as-shole who complained Obama wasn't black enough because he didn't talk like DMX.
Click to expand...

That is what I was hinting at. I honestly dont think it is a problem, but I bet if certain factions of left had their way he would be a bit more...ummm...flamboyant? ;)
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

unofan said:
Policy wonks will lose unless they happen to also roll a 20 on charisma. Charisma first, everything else is secondary.
Click to expand...

These days that is 100% true. If the guy cant get the hair on the back of people's necks to stand up he/she will lose.
 
Kepler said:
I don't believe CA or NY liberals matter. They aren't going to change any election.

Find me somebody whose vote has heft in turning a toss-up -- that's who I care about.
Click to expand...

Well maybe. Under the winner of the popular vote gets the State's electoral votes legislation, NY & CA would have inordinate say on the outcome.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
While trades are a great option to look at, I feel like blue collar traditionalist types will often grunt that "anyone can do it" if they just apply themselves. I don't know about you, but I don't think it's automatically a good idea for someone whose primary aptitude is writing or art or history, to try and learn how to properly wire a house. :)
Click to expand...

I agree with you there. I'm saying that some kids that AREN'T into writing, or art, or history...they are being pushed away from the trades, because it's only what lower class/dumb people do. :)

It's not glamorous work, it's not sitting at a desk surfing the internet for half the day, it's getting a little dirty, putting in some time, sometimes takes a little toll on your body, but the trades right now...no one wants to do it, so pay is a little higher than it was 10-20 years ago.

Edit: Remember, I'm a blue collar convert. I found that out about myself in college.


Also (not directed at you): this is not punishing people for taking out loans. It's making them take responsibility for their actions, which was taking out a loan.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

joecct said:
Well maybe. Under the winner of the popular vote gets the State's electoral votes legislation, NY & CA would have inordinate say on the outcome.
Click to expand...

You misspelled "proportionate."
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

As we all know there is no such thing as predatory lending or taking advantage of people. None. So, they all should buck up and take responsibility.
 
Re: 2020 Democratic Challengers: Who ISN'T Running At This Point?

ScoobyDoo said:
As we all know there is no such thing as predatory lending or taking advantage of people. None. So, they all should buck up and take responsibility.
Click to expand...
Society has no responsibility for constantly choosing ridiculous tax cuts that under-fund public education and shouldn't have to foot the bill for all the predatory loans kids took out because their parents told them to, how convenient!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top