2020 Election - Catch-all Thread

48,040 Views | 1429 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by Anarchistbear
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.

okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am probably in the minority in that I like the drawn-out process.

I remember David Cameron boasting to David Letterman about how short the British elections are.

But in the American system, it's a marathon. And you have to outlast and overcome the scrutiny and the skeletons.
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:

I am probably in the minority in that I like the drawn-out process.

I remember David Cameron boasting to David Letterman about how short the British elections are.

But in the American system, it's a marathon. And you have to outlast and overcome the scrutiny and the skeletons.
I just wish money weren't so important, and that congress had a little more time to get stuff done before worrying about re-election.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

okaydo said:

I am probably in the minority in that I like the drawn-out process.

I remember David Cameron boasting to David Letterman about how short the British elections are.

But in the American system, it's a marathon. And you have to outlast and overcome the scrutiny and the skeletons.
I just wish money weren't so important, and that congress had a little more time to get stuff done before worrying about re-election.
I think you can argue that the long process is good for executive elections but bad for legislative elections.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

BearsWiin said:

It doesn't help that supposedly respectable journalism then reports on random tweets like they're news.
This is a major pet peeve of mine. The news should never report on a tweet unless it is from some official or organization, giving random people a soapbox will only result in extreme perspectives drowning everything else out.
Not to mention that Twitter user Amelia's rant was factually inaccurate. It's lazy and sloppy lowest common denominator journalism to give Twitter crap like that any validation.
I'm not really buying the premise that Beto's announcement was greeted with nothing but positive news coverage. It seems to me that he's gotten a similar percentage of negative stories as other major candidates like Sanders, Harris, Warren, and Klobuchar. Obviously I don't have a comprehensive survey of all news coverage, but I just don't see how it's been kid gloves for him.

If he's personally charismatic and popular, then that's just life. Some people are. It helps in politics.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Beto is getting it from the GOP because they're scared and to test what "sticks" to him. The GOP will do this as SOP. He's also getting some from other Dems pushing for position/policy.

The thing is, Beto got the Vanity Fair cover and had Annie Lebowitz as phototog. That's major action, and that seems like an annointment from the "elite" media. At this point, no other announced candidate got that. What does it mean...Obama got a VF cover, maybe even Annie took the photos.

Here's Obama's cover from 2007. Side note, interesting it wasn't directly about him (but of course it was, but indirect). Of course there's a new context but Beto got a single cover about him and running. Make of it what you will but I'm guessing VF is figuring it can influence the election and Beto is their guy. In 20 months, who knows if this matters.

YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Beto is getting it from the GOP because they're scared and to test what "sticks" to him. The GOP will do this as SOP. He's also getting some from other Dems pushing for position/policy.

The thing is, Beto got the Vanity Fair cover and had Annie Lebowitz as phototog. That's major action, and that seems like an annointment from the "elite" media. At this point, no other announced candidate got that. What does it mean...Obama got a VF cover, maybe even Annie took the photos.

Here's Obama's cover from 2007. Side note, interesting it wasn't directly about him (but of course it was, but indirect). Of course there's a new context but Beto got a single cover about him and running. Make of it what you will but I'm guessing VF is figuring it can influence the election and Beto is their guy. In 20 months, who knows if this matters.



If you're Vanity Fair, and you want to put a prominent presidential candidate on your cover. And you want the cover to be shot by Annie Leibowitz, wouldn't you pick Beto?

His looks are part of his appeal and totally up Vanity Fair's alley. (Of course, Obama and Bill Clinton and George W. Bush's good looks were part of their appeal, too.)

Anyways, this article was published today (it's from The Cut, which is female-oriented part of New York Magazine):


https://www.thecut.com/2019/03/is-beto-orourke-totally-kind-of-hot.html

Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:


If you're Vanity Fair, and you want to put a prominent presidential candidate on your cover. And you want the cover to be shot by Annie Leibowitz, wouldn't you pick Beto?

His looks are part of his appeal and totally up Vanity Fair's alley. (Of course, Obama and Bill Clinton and George W. Bush's good looks were part of their appeal, too.)

Anyways, this article was published today (it's from The Cut, which is female-oriented part of New York Magazine):


https://www.thecut.com/2019/03/is-beto-orourke-totally-kind-of-hot.html


Okay, I get VF is selling magazines and covers sell, so the bigger persona you can get on the cover, the better, more sales. It's business. But again, major mainstream media coverage, from the elite.

Re: The Cut, frankly going with he's "totally kind of hot" seems like an insult to women, at least the smart ones who are informed. Sure he might be cute but you're leading with that instead of the issues? Seems weak and I'm guessing this is EXACTLY the crap that the AOC followers and demographic will rip at. It's totally playing to the stereotype that women only care about girly crap like looks, cuteness...when in fact there's serious crap to discuss (Roe v. Wade, Kavanaugh, #MeToo, equal pay, ERA). Frankly it's both weak tea...and condescending...or really stupid if it's coming from a woman.

Of course you can't ignore looks, it's a reality. But to play to it...totally American, totally shallow AF. Same sh*t as people voted for Dubya because they're rather have a beer with him over Gore. See where that got us?

Policy-wise Beto hasn't released anything...so I have no serious opinion yet. Definitely don't care about image or looks...but youth, yes that matters. He has that. But does he have the chops to do this? I guess we shall see.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
IMO, there is still too much bigotry against homosexuals for the country to be ready for a homosexual president. Congressmen and Senators - depends on how blue the district or state is.

I would vote for him of course if he wins the Democratic nomination, but I don't think he'll be able to win with the #1 concern being defeating Trump rather than electing the best person (I don't know if he is the best person - I just know that many people are enamored of him).
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Beto's long-lost brother was on CBS This Morning this morning.


BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
IMO, there is still too much bigotry against homosexuals for the country to be ready for a homosexual president. Congressmen and Senators - depends on how blue the district or state is.

I would vote for him of course if he wins the Democratic nomination, but I don't think he'll be able to win with the #1 concern being defeating Trump rather than electing the best person (I don't know if he is the best person - I just know that many people are enamored of him).
If not now, when? I'm not of a mind to think this upcoming election is about courting some mythical swing voter; instead it's all about motivating the base to turn out. But even if you want to make the swing voter argument, Pete's managed to get himself elected mayor of a city (by a huge margin) in a state that elected Mike Pence as governor and went to Trump in 2016 by 19 points. Pragmatism trumps orientation.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I thought this was a good breakdown of Beto's current policy stances (yes, he has articulated some):

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"One of the great controversies of our time involves Russia's use of Facebook in 2016. And President Trump, who spent massively on Facebook in 2016, is doubling down on a Facebook strategy again and once again, with few people noticing.

While 2020 Democrats suck up national attention, Trump's re-election campaign has quietly spent nearly twice as much as the entire Democratic field combined on Facebook and Google ads, Axios' Sara Fischer reports.
Trump is outspending the top-spending Democratic candidates (Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris) 9-to-1 in total advertising on Google and Facebook so far.
Why it matters: Political advertising strategists say that this level of spending on digital platforms this early in the campaign season is unprecedented." Axios
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Facebook, Instagram, other social media really needs to be regulated becusue they're not just looking the other way...they're engaged with the election "fixers"/scammers like Cambridge Analytica. Facebook Execs met with Cambridge in 2016.

The Green New Deal has been pitched, now we need the New Digital Fairness Doctrine, to protect democracy.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
How the politics of racial resentment is killing white people

https://apple.news/AyYGXkJdeT-ypwB9Y2z98PQ
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
IMO, there is still too much bigotry against homosexuals for the country to be ready for a homosexual president. Congressmen and Senators - depends on how blue the district or state is.

I would vote for him of course if he wins the Democratic nomination, but I don't think he'll be able to win with the #1 concern being defeating Trump rather than electing the best person (I don't know if he is the best person - I just know that many people are enamored of him).
If not now, when? I'm not of a mind to think this upcoming election is about courting some mythical swing voter; instead it's all about motivating the base to turn out. But even if you want to make the swing voter argument, Pete's managed to get himself elected mayor of a city (by a huge margin) in a state that elected Mike Pence as governor and went to Trump in 2016 by 19 points. Pragmatism trumps orientation.
Yeah, but he's mayor of a college town and even in red states college towns tend to lean more to the left. Plus when he was elected, he hadn't come out yet so he established himself before people thought of him as a gay candidate.

I'd love to be wrong though.
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
IMO, there is still too much bigotry against homosexuals for the country to be ready for a homosexual president. Congressmen and Senators - depends on how blue the district or state is.

I would vote for him of course if he wins the Democratic nomination, but I don't think he'll be able to win with the #1 concern being defeating Trump rather than electing the best person (I don't know if he is the best person - I just know that many people are enamored of him).
If not now, when? I'm not of a mind to think this upcoming election is about courting some mythical swing voter; instead it's all about motivating the base to turn out. But even if you want to make the swing voter argument, Pete's managed to get himself elected mayor of a city (by a huge margin) in a state that elected Mike Pence as governor and went to Trump in 2016 by 19 points. Pragmatism trumps orientation.
Yeah, but he's mayor of a college town and even in red states college towns tend to lean more to the left. Plus when he was elected, he hadn't come out yet so he established himself before people thought of him as a gay candidate.

I'd love to be wrong though.
He was re-elected with 80% of the vote two years after he came out
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:


Yeah, but he's mayor of a college town and even in red states college towns tend to lean more to the left.
Confirming what I suspected.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mayors_of_South_Bend,_Indiana
BGolden
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ducky23 said:

B.A. Bearacus said:




Trump is so unique to the point that I just don't think you can rely too much on these polls.

I think there's a lot of people (not just a handful) who are too embarrassed to admit to a pollster that they are going to vote for trump

Just look at this board. I doubt you will get a single person here who says they are going to vote for trump in 2020. And yet, I guarantee you that a bunch will.
No one bothers around here. There are other interesting places to view discussions.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
IMO, there is still too much bigotry against homosexuals for the country to be ready for a homosexual president. Congressmen and Senators - depends on how blue the district or state is.

I would vote for him of course if he wins the Democratic nomination, but I don't think he'll be able to win with the #1 concern being defeating Trump rather than electing the best person (I don't know if he is the best person - I just know that many people are enamored of him).
If not now, when? I'm not of a mind to think this upcoming election is about courting some mythical swing voter; instead it's all about motivating the base to turn out. But even if you want to make the swing voter argument, Pete's managed to get himself elected mayor of a city (by a huge margin) in a state that elected Mike Pence as governor and went to Trump in 2016 by 19 points. Pragmatism trumps orientation.
Yeah, but he's mayor of a college town and even in red states college towns tend to lean more to the left. Plus when he was elected, he hadn't come out yet so he established himself before people thought of him as a gay candidate.

I'd love to be wrong though.
Not wrong but NW Indiana (aka The Region) is basically a suburb of Chicago, so its politics reflect that; a major metro with a moderate-liberal Democratic leaning, but entrenched politics (unions, rust belt, race) that sometimes goes counter... vs. deep dark Indiana red. College town no doubt helped.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

Yogi Bear said:

BearsWiin said:

golden sloth said:

Buttigieg went on Fox news, sure its not Hannity or Carlson, but I think its good he is at least reaching out in hostile territory.


I'm all in for Mayor Pete. Not knowing who he was a year ago isn't going to keep me from working for the one I think is the best candidate.
IMO, there is still too much bigotry against homosexuals for the country to be ready for a homosexual president. Congressmen and Senators - depends on how blue the district or state is.

I would vote for him of course if he wins the Democratic nomination, but I don't think he'll be able to win with the #1 concern being defeating Trump rather than electing the best person (I don't know if he is the best person - I just know that many people are enamored of him).
If not now, when? I'm not of a mind to think this upcoming election is about courting some mythical swing voter; instead it's all about motivating the base to turn out. But even if you want to make the swing voter argument, Pete's managed to get himself elected mayor of a city (by a huge margin) in a state that elected Mike Pence as governor and went to Trump in 2016 by 19 points. Pragmatism trumps orientation.
Yeah, but he's mayor of a college town and even in red states college towns tend to lean more to the left. Plus when he was elected, he hadn't come out yet so he established himself before people thought of him as a gay candidate.

I'd love to be wrong though.
Not wrong but NW Indiana (aka The Region) is basically a suburb of Chicago, so its politics reflect that; a major metro with a moderate-liberal Democratic leaning, but entrenched politics (unions, rust belt, race) that sometimes goes counter... vs. deep dark Indiana red. College town no doubt helped.
What you say may be correct, but I think the difference with Buttigieg (and Yang for that matter), is the message they are trying to project. Although the policies are progressive, they are reaching out to those voters that voted for Obama and then Trump, whereas the message of someone like Warren, O'Rourke or Harris immediately turns those voters off. And yes, that is all unsubstantiated speculation, so feel free to disagree.

As for the gay thing, I think more people in the midwest would immediately write Harris off simply because she is from California before they write Buttigieg off for being gay, again that is pure speculation.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yup, anything California from the Midwest's perspective is tainted with hippie, dope, formincator and weirdos...and they'll tell that to you with that Midwestern charm.

"Oh yeah, the weather is great but you don't want to move to California. you'll end up in porn or on drugs and it'll be your fault you know. But when you get back call me and we'll have some brewskis".
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Devin Nunes is going to have to dismiss this case before he submits to a deposition or responds to a demand to produce documents because this dude is a wee bit dirty.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/devin-nunes-ludicrous-250-million-lawsuit-against-twitter-explained/%3famp=1
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

Devin Nunes is going to have to dismiss this case before he submits to a deposition or responds to a demand to produce documents because this dude is a wee bit dirty.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/devin-nunes-ludicrous-250-million-lawsuit-against-twitter-explained/%3famp=1

These lawsuit numbers are getting too outlandish.

Like: Should that Covingteen teen deserve $525 million in damages.




Or this:



bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If that entitled little pr@ck from Kentucky stood that close to me with that look on his face his prayer for damages would not be unreasonable.

Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

whereas the message of someone like Warren, O'Rourke or Harris immediately turns those voters off. And yes, that is all unsubstantiated speculation, so feel free to disagree.

I definitely would not put O'Rourke in that group. He clearly won plenty of crossover voters in Texas.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
O'Rourke has voted for the interests of his district- pro military, pro fossil fuel. He's a centrist.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

O'Rourke has voted for the interests of his district- pro military, pro fossil fuel. He's a centrist.
By his more recent stances (Senate race onward), he's not. He's more centrist than Sanders or Warren, but pretty liberal as compared to all American politicians.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

Devin Nunes is going to have to dismiss this case before he submits to a deposition or responds to a demand to produce documents because this dude is a wee bit dirty.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/devin-nunes-ludicrous-250-million-lawsuit-against-twitter-explained/%3famp=1
Its just to keep the argument big tech is against conservatives, even though conservatives are the ones brutally abusing the gaps in oversight on the tech platforms and data mining process. The fact it helps temporarily distract from the Trump is a minor plus.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

golden sloth said:

whereas the message of someone like Warren, O'Rourke or Harris immediately turns those voters off. And yes, that is all unsubstantiated speculation, so feel free to disagree.

I definitely would not put O'Rourke in that group. He clearly won plenty of crossover voters in Texas.
On second thought I agree with you.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'd regard him as more like Clinton- centrist to me.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

I'd regard him as more like Clinton- centrist to me.
I mean "centrist" basically means nothing by itself. Centrist relative to what? Your own personal politics? The median Democratic voter? The median American voter? I'd agree with the second one.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Was trying to catch some videos of Kamala Harris speaking during her campaign to better educate myself on her, but as of yet not much is out there since she declared (it seems the people with the lowest profiles are the ones making the most TV appearances). I found the one below, and I came away thinking that she can do really well on the coasts, but in the upper great lakes I don't see her connecting with voters. I don't believe Criminal Justice Reform as a winning issue in those states (I don't mean to dismiss it as unimportant, just that in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, I don't see that messaage recapturing the voters that went for both Obama and Trump).

The catch is that, my logic says the easiest way to a Democratic White House is through the industrial midwest, which means flipping a few states that Trump narrowly won and where he has a net approval rating of -5. Perhaps, Harris' message of Criminal Justice Reform plays better in the southern states, and gives her the opportunity to turn states like Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina. Taking those states would allow her to loose the industrial midwest.

golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:

golden sloth said:

okaydo said:

golden sloth said:

bearister said:


I'm not on twitter, because its horrible and I have no interest in being in that sphere, but I was surprised at the number of attack columns from the left regarding Beto on the day of his announcement. What surprised me about them is that there are legitimate arguments against Beto (he is too young, he is only known for losing an election, he has no definitive policy goals or objectives), but the criticisms circled around him being a relatively young, white male, as if that should be a disqualifying factor.


Beto's critics don't object to him being a white male. They object to white male privilege.

This sums it up:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/beto-orourke-president-sexist-double-standards_n_5c8aa5cbe4b0db7da9f0c7e7

"Man, I'm just born to be in it."

That rubs people the wrong way. There's a certain kind of privilege that you have to have to go from nobody to loser to presidential candidate in less than a year.

There's this feeling -- whether you like it or not -- that there is a double standard for white males. Women and minorities will be overly scrutinized, while if you're white and male you can get away with a lot of things and it'll be excused. Heck, look at our current president.

But if you think being white and male doesn't get you special treatment, I can't help you. But all you have to see is the Republican party hearings. So many dummies become congressmen because of their gender and color of their school.

There's also the issue of him being a centrist. His policies might be popular for red Texas. But liberals don't like it. He wants to reach across the aisle, like he did when he endorsed a Republican congressman last year. But liberals already saw how Obama's attempt at bipartisanship failed.

Also, if you're high-profile like Beto is you're going to get more scrutinized than, say, that Buttagig guy.

Again, it's not about being a white male -- or else left wingers would've disqualified Bernie Sanders last time around. It's about white male privilege.




I get the centrist reason for attacking him, but I don't understand how his decision to run is an exercise in privilege. Tulsi Gabbard has equivalent experience, Pete Buttigieg has less experience at the national level, Andrew Yang has no experience, are these people exercising privilege? If the whole argument is based on his saying "Man, I'm just born to be in it." and then just conjecturing out. I don't see what prevents any of Andrew Yang, Tulsi Gabbard, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg or anyone else from saying that.

Beto is a big-name guy. You can't really compare him to Tulsi, Buttigieg or Yang.

There are different expectations for Beto than from those people most of us have never heard of.

So when Beto announces a candidacy that is more about his personality and that he likes punk rock than actual substance, in which he expresses uncertainty about actually running, well, it's going to draw criticism.

If Beto had come out guns a-blazing like, say, Obama in Illinois' capital, I'd bet the reaction would be totally different.

But it is viewed as exercise in privilege in that he could do that.
Stumbled across Trevor Noah's bit on the Beto 'scandals' and I still kind of agree with Noah. (He start getting to the point about 2:00 in).

 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.