Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-11-2019, 11:28 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,067

Biggest Worry for 2020


The democratic party is becoming splintered more by the day and whether you love or despise Ocasio-Cortez, the "new green deal" and social/progressive movement there is no question it is driving away the moderate/centrist democrats.

If Trump wins in 2020 i lay the blame firmly at the feet of the democrats inability to coalesce into a unified party.
  #2  
Old 02-11-2019, 11:59 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,623
I see no evidence of any splintering. Vigorous and passionate debate isn't splintering. I'm very excited for an energetic primary for the presidential election -- lots of different ideas are good, not bad.
  #3  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:04 PM
Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 30,972
Yeah, I've got to also ask where the splintering is taking place. I assume that you personally feel it, chargerrich, but I don't. There. We're evened out. Now make a case for the country.
  #4  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:10 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,392
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
...whether you love or despise Ocasio-Cortez, the "new green deal" and social/progressive movement there is no question it is driving away the moderate/centrist democrats.

...
Driving them to vote against Democrats? I don't expect so. But if a third party candidate gets a lot of votes in 2020, and the Democratic candidate gets an unusually low vote then I may concede the point. If Trump as so-called president doesn't drive Democrats to vote in even higher numbers than in 2016, then nothing will.
  #5  
Old 02-11-2019, 12:18 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,370
Dude, we've got 22 months until E-Day. There's no such thing as splintering at this point. If anything we're seeing more jockeying for position.

Remember, too, that the overwhelming goal of D voters right now is someone who will beat Trump evening if that means sacrificing ideological purity.

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-ins...oll_us_020419/

Quote:
The poll also asked registered Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents about their party’s nomination process. In considering who should be their party’s standard bearer, a majority of 56% prefer someone who would be a strong candidate against Trump even if they disagree with that candidate on most issues. Just 33% say they would prefer a nominee who they are aligned with on the issues even if that person would have a hard time beating Trump. Democratic women (61%) are more likely than men (45%) to say they would put their policy positions aside in order to get a nominee who could beat Trump.
That's not a sign of splintering. That's a sign of a group with eyes on the prize and a realization of how high the stakes are.
  #6  
Old 02-11-2019, 01:30 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
I fear that the dems might put up another warmonger. Nobody outside the DMV wants to hear that shit anymore.
  #7  
Old 02-11-2019, 02:08 PM
kenobi 65's Avatar
kenobi 65 is online now
Corellian Nerfherder
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brookfield, IL
Posts: 14,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
I fear that the dems might put up another warmonger. Nobody outside the DMV wants to hear that shit anymore.
I'm assuming that, by "DMV," you're referring to "DC / Maryland / Virginia," and not the Department of Motor Vehicles (those warmongering clerks!)
  #8  
Old 02-11-2019, 02:35 PM
Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 30,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
I fear that the dems might put up another warmonger. Nobody outside the DMV wants to hear that shit anymore.
Warmonger? Trump just canceled the nuclear treaty with Russia, the only logical outcome of which is a new nuclear arms race. What could a Democrat do that would be more warlike?
  #9  
Old 02-11-2019, 02:46 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
Dude, we've got 22 months until E-Day. There's no such thing as splintering at this point. If anything we're seeing more jockeying for position.

Remember, too, that the overwhelming goal of D voters right now is someone who will beat Trump evening if that means sacrificing ideological purity.

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-ins...oll_us_020419/



That's not a sign of splintering. That's a sign of a group with eyes on the prize and a realization of how high the stakes are.
I agree with this. My only worry is that we will not end up with the person who has the highest likelihood of beating Trump and flushing him and his cadre of sycophants down the toilet, and instead select someone (P or VP) who is too divisive. We need the middle this time, in strong numbers - crossover votes is what will be the deciding factor IMHO. If we cannot get moderate/conservatives to come over this time, they will stay with Trump; selecting someone too far left will be problematic.
  #10  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:28 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,673
Crossover votes? That didn't work for Hillary, did it?

Granted, an Amy Klobuchar or Kirsten Gillibrand won't be seen as the actual archdemoness Hillary Rodham Clinton, so may have a better shot with some conservatives. But too many Republicans want to vote for their own kind. There are very few crossover votes to be had.

Don't try to steal conservatives. For one thing, you'll screw up trying; conservatives caricature liberals, & liberals caricature conservatives; your misperceptions will betray you. For another, you need your own base, not someone else's. Try to appeal to Americans as Americans. No, scratch that. Try to appeal to people who want the country to work better.

And WillFarnaby is probably right about one thing. A warmonger is not what your own base is looking for; they want the USA to deal with the many, many problems here at home. That said, we do need some actual foreign policy people in the Democratic Party; you know, diplomats.

Last edited by foolsguinea; 02-11-2019 at 03:29 PM.
  #11  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:35 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Warmonger? Trump just canceled the nuclear treaty with Russia, the only logical outcome of which is a new nuclear arms race. What could a Democrat do that would be more warlike?
Given that the dems have gone crazy on the Russia issue, I could only imagine how nuts they’ll be when they try to appear more tough on Russia than the reckless Trump.
  #12  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:41 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
IMHO Sanders or Biden have the best chance and they have their own challenges to overcome.
  #13  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:41 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
I fear that the dems might put up another warmonger. Nobody outside the DMV wants to hear that shit anymore.
Good thing we got those Ultra-Pacifist Republicans!

Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Given that the dems have gone crazy on the Russia issue, I could only imagine how nuts they’ll be when they try to appear more tough on Russia than the reckless Trump.
Being "more tough" on Russia than Donald Trump is like being "more alive" than a dead person.
  #14  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:43 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
I agree with this. My only worry is that we will not end up with the person who has the highest likelihood of beating Trump and flushing him and his cadre of sycophants down the toilet, and instead select someone (P or VP) who is too divisive. We need the middle this time, in strong numbers - crossover votes is what will be the deciding factor IMHO. If we cannot get moderate/conservatives to come over this time, they will stay with Trump; selecting someone too far left will be problematic.
Its not mod/conservatives you need. Its sitter-outers, independents and center-left.

Granted by moderate you may have meant some of these folks.
  #15  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:43 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 8,693
I guess all these investigations are a waste of time and money because everybody keeps talking about how to beat Trump - which means he will be on the ballot in 2020 as if nothing happened.
  #16  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:45 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by foolsguinea View Post
Crossover votes? That didn't work for Hillary, did it?

Granted, an Amy Klobuchar or Kirsten Gillibrand won't be seen as the actual archdemoness Hillary Rodham Clinton, so may have a better shot with some conservatives. But too many Republicans want to vote for their own kind. There are very few crossover votes to be had.

Don't try to steal conservatives. For one thing, you'll screw up trying; conservatives caricature liberals, & liberals caricature conservatives; your misperceptions will betray you. For another, you need your own base, not someone else's. Try to appeal to Americans as Americans. No, scratch that. Try to appeal to people who want the country to work better.

And WillFarnaby is probably right about one thing. A warmonger is not what your own base is looking for; they want the USA to deal with the many, many problems here at home. That said, we do need some actual foreign policy people in the Democratic Party; you know, diplomats.
I don't think Hillary made a concerted effort to court crossover votes. She also had the legacy of the smear campaign as headwinds, so held little appeal there from the start. I think a moderate Dem candidate will retain the Dem base, but also pull-in some of those in the center who are fed-up with the GOP hijinx of late - they wont find some of the more progressive candidates appealing.

My opinion is that ~40% of voters will vote Democrat no matter who is on the ticket (if you can get them to the polls), and ~40% will always vote Republican no matter what. I suspect there are ~20% of voters who we should be vying for this time around - these are the voters who put Trump in office. We ignore or vilify them again and it will show we have not learned anything from 2016.
  #17  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:49 PM
snowthx's Avatar
snowthx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sacratomato area
Posts: 3,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I guess all these investigations are a waste of time and money because everybody keeps talking about how to beat Trump - which means he will be on the ballot in 2020 as if nothing happened.
Until I witness El Guano in an orange jumpsuit getting his head twisted toward the press (ala El Chapo) and getting frogmarched to Leavenworth (thanks, Little Nemo), I wont count on him being convicted of any crimes. Show me the money!
  #18  
Old 02-11-2019, 03:56 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
I don't think Hillary made a concerted effort to court crossover votes. She also had the legacy of the smear campaign as headwinds, so held little appeal there from the start. I think a moderate Dem candidate will retain the Dem base, but also pull-in some of those in the center who are fed-up with the GOP hijinx of late - they wont find some of the more progressive candidates appealing.

My opinion is that ~40% of voters will vote Democrat no matter who is on the ticket (if you can get them to the polls), and ~40% will always vote Republican no matter what. I suspect there are ~20% of voters who we should be vying for this time around - these are the voters who put Trump in office. We ignore or vilify them again and it will show we have not learned anything from 2016.
Like calling Jill Stein a Russian agent? Using 'Bernie Bro' as a derisive term?

It's weird. Most newspapers will support a Dem candidate, CNN and MSNBC, Young Turks, Slate, Salon, Vox, the entirety of Gizmodo if its still around....95% of celebrities...

...and in the end they will probably cost the Dems millions of votes.
  #19  
Old 02-11-2019, 04:50 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
Good thing we got those Ultra-Pacifist Republicans!


Being "more tough" on Russia than Donald Trump is like being "more alive" than a dead person.
So he’s not starting an arms race? Ya’ll get back to me when this is coherent.
  #20  
Old 02-11-2019, 05:19 PM
Steve MB is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 13,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
So he’s not starting an arms race?
He's starting an arms race to destabilize the Western Alliance in his puppetmaster Putin's interests, yes.
__________________
The Internet: Nobody knows if you're a dog. Everybody knows if you're a jackass.
  #21  
Old 02-11-2019, 05:23 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve MB View Post
He's starting an arms race to destabilize the Western Alliance in his puppetmaster Putin's interests, yes.
So it’s not warlike? Talk amongst yourselves. You may have something here.
  #22  
Old 02-11-2019, 05:30 PM
Vinyl Turnip is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 20,010
Historically, surrender is one of the more reliable ways to avoid war.
  #23  
Old 02-11-2019, 05:39 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip View Post
Historically, surrender is one of the more reliable ways to avoid war.
Will we be lowering our military budget and incarceration rates to Russia's??

I for one welcome our Bolshevik overlords.
  #24  
Old 02-11-2019, 05:57 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
I fear that the dems might put up another warmonger. Nobody outside the DMV wants to hear that shit anymore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenobi 65 View Post
I'm assuming that, by "DMV," you're referring to "DC / Maryland / Virginia," and not the Department of Motor Vehicles (those warmongering clerks!)
Have I mentioned how much I despise that shorthand? One of the local stations, DC-101, uses it with great regularity. It's their surefire way of getting me to see what's playing on WRNR instead.

Because I may have lived in Maryland for 20 years now, where we have the MVA, but before that I lived for >30 years in Virginia, where the DMV was the place that handled tags and title and driver's license. It's a bit late to even try to repurpose that acronym.
  #25  
Old 02-11-2019, 06:00 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
I fear that the dems might put up another warmonger. Nobody outside the DMV wants to hear that shit anymore.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Warmonger? Trump just canceled the nuclear treaty with Russia, the only logical outcome of which is a new nuclear arms race. What could a Democrat do that would be more warlike?
Not to mention, the Trump Administration is talking about war with Iran, and military intervention in Venezuela. And a year or so ago, they were threatening war with North Korea.

Nice peaceful people you've got there, Will.

Last edited by RTFirefly; 02-11-2019 at 06:00 PM.
  #26  
Old 02-11-2019, 06:14 PM
Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 30,972
I remember when Obama started a war with Granada. Oh wait, that was Reagan. Trump wants to start a war every week because, well, just because. He has literally subscribed to the ancient theory that if he acts crazy he forces his enemies to be cautious.

Back here in reality, look at the midterms. Turnout by liberals was through the roof higher than in recent midterms. That was very good for the Democrats. The Republicans enjoyed that in 2010, a midterm when conservatives turned out and liberals did not.

This election will turn on turnout. Getting the bases energized is trivial because that's already happened. Getting new people to vote is absolutely critical - look at the lengths to which Republicans are going in order to prevent increased turnout by perceived Democrats. They are out of their minds scared at what turnout can do.

Forget about independents and centrists. They are mythical creatures. The real pool consists of disaffecteds, people who didn't think their vote would be meaningful or cared sufficiently to overcome the barriers placed in front of them. Black turnout declined in 2016 after Obama; it alone was sufficient to swing states in favor of Trump. Get black voters back. Get Hispanics enraged by the anti-immigrant frenzy. Help the women whose grassroots organizations made a difference last year to do even more in 2020.

Which Democrat will be best suited to energize the disaffecteds? No idea. Obama did so and that surprised almost everyone. The Democrats have to slog through the messy primaries to find out who clicks and who has the strength to climb to the top of that stadium-sized pile. All I can say is beware the person who claims they have to pick some centrist who doesn't offend too many people. The best candidate will enrage some, but engage many more.
  #27  
Old 02-11-2019, 06:28 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
I remember when Obama started a war with Granada. Oh wait, that was Reagan. Trump wants to start a war every week because, well, just because. He has literally subscribed to the ancient theory that if he acts crazy he forces his enemies to be cautious.

Back here in reality, look at the midterms. Turnout by liberals was through the roof higher than in recent midterms. That was very good for the Democrats. The Republicans enjoyed that in 2010, a midterm when conservatives turned out and liberals did not.

This election will turn on turnout. Getting the bases energized is trivial because that's already happened. Getting new people to vote is absolutely critical - look at the lengths to which Republicans are going in order to prevent increased turnout by perceived Democrats. They are out of their minds scared at what turnout can do.

Forget about independents and centrists. They are mythical creatures. The real pool consists of disaffecteds, people who didn't think their vote would be meaningful or cared sufficiently to overcome the barriers placed in front of them. Black turnout declined in 2016 after Obama; it alone was sufficient to swing states in favor of Trump. Get black voters back. Get Hispanics enraged by the anti-immigrant frenzy.(1) Help the women whose grassroots organizations made a difference last year to do even more in 2020.

Which Democrat will be best suited to energize the disaffecteds? No idea. Obama did so(2) and that surprised almost everyone. The Democrats have to slog through the messy primaries to find out who clicks and who has the strength to climb to the top of that stadium-sized pile. All I can say is beware the person who claims they have to pick some centrist who doesn't offend too many people.(3) The best candidate will enrage some, but engage many more.
(1) I know that Miami Cubans don't give a shit about the anti-immigration frenzy because they came legally and 'made it'. I don't have any info on other ethnic legal immigrants. Do you? Not being snide. Genuinely asking anyone really.

(2) Obama won because he came off as a good man. So did Clinton. So did Carter. Americans REALLY do want to vote for a good man. Which leads to 3...

(3) That's why I said I think Biden can win if he can overcome the eventual accusations from all sides of being a neoliberal centrist. Whether he really is not important. The accusations will come.

Assuming he runs of course.
  #28  
Old 02-11-2019, 07:09 PM
Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 30,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
(1) I know that Miami Cubans don't give a shit about the anti-immigration frenzy because they came legally and 'made it'. I don't have any info on other ethnic legal immigrants. Do you? Not being snide. Genuinely asking anyone really.
According to Wikipedia, 4% of Hispanics are of Cuban origin and 62% are from Mexico. I think that on a national level Cubans are rounding error.
  #29  
Old 02-11-2019, 10:58 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,673
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowthx View Post
My opinion is that ~40% of voters will vote Democrat no matter who is on the ticket (if you can get them to the polls), and ~40% will always vote Republican no matter what. I suspect there are ~20% of voters who we should be vying for this time around - these are the voters who put Trump in office. We ignore or vilify them again and it will show we have not learned anything from 2016.
Do you think that 20% want a "moderate Democrat" or a "throw something at the wall and see if it sticks" populist?

Remember that these people probably heavily voted for Perot and Trump. I don't know that the apparently reasonable, small-c conservative swing voters are any more key to turnout than the excitable, ignorant, & desperate.
  #30  
Old 02-11-2019, 11:11 PM
Dacien is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 329
The only thing Democrats had to do was be normal, represent a return to normalcy and dignity and mainstream appeal.

And they completely botched it. If Trump wins in 2020, it will be in no small part due to the extremism of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
  #31  
Old 02-12-2019, 01:45 AM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,673
They've already botched it? How is this in the past tense?

What's abnormal here?
  #32  
Old 02-12-2019, 04:01 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Not to mention, the Trump Administration is talking about war with Iran, and military intervention in Venezuela. And a year or so ago, they were threatening war with North Korea.

Nice peaceful people you've got there, Will.
Please tell me where I said Trump was peaceful in absolute terms. I have called him relatively peaceful, and applauded his antiwar rhetoric but that was during the campaign.

Hopefully this all remains talk and doesn’t become another Libya or Yemen, Iraq or Afganistan, ...
  #33  
Old 02-12-2019, 07:14 AM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 40,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
The democratic party is becoming splintered more by the day and whether you love or despise Ocasio-Cortez, the "new green deal" and social/progressive movement there is no question it is driving away the moderate/centrist democrats.
Um, I have quite a lot of questions, actually. Is this true? How do you know it's true - do you have evidence people are leaving the party?
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #34  
Old 02-12-2019, 07:36 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Please tell me where I said Trump was peaceful in absolute terms. I have called him relatively peaceful, and applauded his antiwar rhetoric but that was during the campaign.

Hopefully this all remains talk and doesn’t become another Libya or Yemen, Iraq or Afganistan, ...
If you're going to accuse the Dems of being warmongers, "compared to whom?" is a fair question. You seem to be ducking it.
  #35  
Old 02-12-2019, 07:43 AM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
If you're going to accuse the Dems of being warmongers, "compared to whom?" is a fair question. You seem to be ducking it.
If we want to compare peace-candidate-turned-president Trump to peace-candidate-turned-president Obama I gotta day its kinda murky. Compared to Clinton, still murkier. My fear is that the Dems don’t put up a good candidate. Is that too much to ask? I would just like a decent person. The bar is low.
  #36  
Old 02-12-2019, 07:46 AM
Vinyl Turnip is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 20,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
Um, I have quite a lot of questions, actually. Is this true? How do you know it's true - do you have evidence people are leaving the party?
It's being reported by journalists across the spectrum from Sean Hannity to Jeanine Pirro.
  #37  
Old 02-12-2019, 08:10 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 18,652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I guess all these investigations are a waste of time and money because everybody keeps talking about how to beat Trump - which means he will be on the ballot in 2020 as if nothing happened.
Can any lawyers here help us out? If Trump is convicted by the Senate, or indicted for felonies, can he run for re-election in 2020?

Because his base will just trreat any indictment or conviction as another badge of honor for their man. Here's a video which offers insight into the 35% of the population which supports Trump without reservation. Watch it all the way through.
  #38  
Old 02-12-2019, 08:29 AM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Yet again, Titletown
Posts: 22,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Can any lawyers here help us out? If Trump is convicted by the Senate, or indicted for felonies, can he run for re-election in 2020?
The Senate can choose a range of penalties if they convict. One is removal from office, another is a bar from future Federal office. What they choose to impose is up to them.

I don't think being indicted for felonies is a bar from running for Federal office.
  #39  
Old 02-12-2019, 08:37 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
I would just like a decent person. The bar is low.
The trouble is that we likely have different standards on who counts as "a decent person".
  #40  
Old 02-12-2019, 08:56 AM
D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telemark View Post
I don't think being indicted for felonies is a bar from running for Federal office.
It's not. See Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ).
  #41  
Old 02-12-2019, 11:20 AM
Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 30,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Can any lawyers here help us out? If Trump is convicted by the Senate, or indicted for felonies, can he run for re-election in 2020?
The Senate can choose to impose a penalty on an impeached politician of barring the person for another federal office.
Quote:
Article I, Section 3:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law.
  #42  
Old 02-12-2019, 11:37 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telemark View Post
The Senate can choose a range of penalties if they convict. One is removal from office, another is a bar from future Federal office. What they choose to impose is up to them.
Correct. Article I, Section 3.
Quote:
I don't think being indicted for felonies is a bar from running for Federal office.
Being indicted for a crime isn't a bar to anything. Innocent until proven guilty, and all that.

ETA: Should've refreshed sooner, I see Exapno was there waaaaay ahead of me!

Last edited by RTFirefly; 02-12-2019 at 11:39 AM.
  #43  
Old 02-12-2019, 11:39 AM
chargerrich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
Um, I have quite a lot of questions, actually. Is this true? How do you know it's true - do you have evidence people are leaving the party?
I made no statements of fact, it is my opinion based on about a dozen full blown Dems I have talked about this with. The traditional democratic doctrine is growing as far apart from the ultra left/progressive as Trump is moving away from Reagan's Republicans.

At this point, I am not sure if the Ocasio-Cortez movement is any better than Trump's. I despise them both for VERY different reasons.
  #44  
Old 02-12-2019, 11:43 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
I made no statements of fact, it is my opinion based on about a dozen full blown Dems I have talked about this with. The traditional democratic doctrine is growing as far apart from the ultra left/progressive as Trump is moving away from Reagan's Republicans.

At this point, I am not sure if the Ocasio-Cortez movement is any better than Trump's. I despise them both for VERY different reasons.
Universal health care, higher minimum wage, higher taxes on the rich, increased emphasis on green energy and reduction in fossil fuel usage, and social justice (LGBTQ rights, civil/voting rights, opposing racism and bigotry, etc.) have been core parts of the "traditional" Democratic party doctrine for decades. There's disagreement on the best way to achieve those core goals, but your assertions above strike me as highly contrary to the facts.
  #45  
Old 02-12-2019, 12:06 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 4,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
The trouble is that we likely have different standards on who counts as "a decent person".
Yes it appears your bar is significantly lower than mine. For example, a lot of these democratic candidates, Harris especially, dont come close to decent. Others like Gabbard and Sanders do.
  #46  
Old 02-12-2019, 12:11 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 32,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Yes it appears your bar is significantly lower than mine.
LOL.

In case you're actually interested in some sort of discussion on this, you are incorrect. Some folks think that some of the things you have advocated (like relying on the hope of charity to take care of those whose care would be unprofitable, or opposing civil rights laws, just for a couple of examples) are profoundly immoral/indecent. Thus it's not about "lower" or higher bars, but rather that our standards of morality/decency are profoundly different.

It can be difficult to comprehend that others may think in very different ways from yourself, but hopefully this helps you understand this.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-12-2019 at 12:16 PM.
  #47  
Old 02-12-2019, 01:32 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
Btw...politics are so screwed up in this country...I would bet 95% of us here could raise Trumps approval rating with our hands tied behind our backs. I'm dead serious.

"Donnie. Baby. Just appear reasonable. Make a series of moves over time to make yourself appear more Presidential. The bar has been set so low that it will be easy. Tomorrow admit that you spend too much time on Twitter and you'll use it only for non-toxic means. Next week, make some kind of anti-war gesture. ANY KIND.....Look Donnie, right now the Democratic platform is 'Just be Anti-Trump'. By appearing more rational, you will force them to appear more and more irrational as they oppose anything you say."

Last edited by Dale Sams; 02-12-2019 at 01:32 PM.
  #48  
Old 02-12-2019, 04:34 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 58,504
If Trump could take rational advice, he wouldn't be Trump.
  #49  
Old 02-12-2019, 05:04 PM
SpoilerVirgin is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: An antique land
Posts: 7,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by chargerrich View Post
I made no statements of fact, it is my opinion based on about a dozen full blown Dems I have talked about this with.
Have you talked to a dozen full blown Dems who say that they would vote for Trump over the Democratic candidate in 2020? Or not vote at all, and allow Trump to win by default?

Because that's what we're talking about. I swore I would never vote for Hillary Clinton, and then when it came down to it, I had to vote for her when confronted with the alternative.

I know of no Democrat who at this stage is saying that they will not support a Democrat for President. Are you saying that you know people who truly believe that it would be better to have Trump for another four years than to have a progressive in office?
  #50  
Old 02-12-2019, 05:38 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoilerVirgin View Post
Have you talked to a dozen full blown Dems who say that they would vote for Trump over the Democratic candidate in 2020? Or not vote at all, and allow Trump to win by default?

Because that's what we're talking about. I swore I would never vote for Hillary Clinton, and then when it came down to it, I had to vote for her when confronted with the alternative.

I know of no Democrat who at this stage is saying that they will not support a Democrat for President. Are you saying that you know people who truly believe that it would be better to have Trump for another four years than to have a progressive in office?
Look at it from another angle...what has the Dem party done to convince the Sitter-outers, the Jill Stein voters, the 'Bernie bros' to vote this time? Are you solely counting on "Ughhhh....Trump sucks, I gots to vote him out"? Cause IMHO that effect is not as great as many seem to believe.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017