Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #401  
Old 05-03-2019, 12:29 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
His credentials are 10x what Beto's are.

Pffffffffft.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
He's well educated and articulate and young and is willing to address some nuance and complexity. Is that enough? He lacks experience or appeal to important segments of Ds, D-leaners, and swingable Independents. He'd do okay keeping the Romney-Clinton voters but not appeal to many of the Obama-Trump ones or maximize Black turn-out or get Hispanic voters off their asses.

You really nailed it here.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #402  
Old 05-03-2019, 01:14 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,890
I don't know what thread I posted it in, maybe it was this one. But I've got my own personal polling audience: my Uncle G (retired railworker, active retiree union member, lives in Metro Detroit, solid Democrat for years, 2x Obama voter, sat out 2016) and my Cousin D (Millennial, currently a utility worker, active union member, lives in Metro Detroit, Obama voter the one time he was old enough to vote for him, voted for Trump in 2016). Neither would be excited for Pete, although Cousin D has a gay brother, so that wouldn't be the stumbling block for him. The fact that Pete doesn't come across as an Alpha Male would probably be the major stumbling block for both.

Biden, Booker and Bernie all come across as Alphas and could carry solid lunch-bucket messages. THIS is what will appeal to the industrial Midwest voters like my Uncle G and Cousin D. Never mind these candidates' records. Forget that Biden did something with banks, or Booker has taken money from drug companies, or Bernie is a "socialist". These guys can speak to Uncle G and Cousin D. Klobuchar would be mocked by them, as would Gillibrand and Warren and Kamala as well as many of the current B/C-list candidates (Castro, Beto, Hickenlooper, Inslee, Gabbard,) And I just don't see blue collar guys in MI, PA and WI showing up for "Little Petey" (as I'm sure this is how Trump would characterize him).

Biden, Booker or Bernie. These are the candidates that will have support from the blue-collar voters and their families in the industrial Midwest. I love Pete, and hope he's president someday. January 20, 2021 is not that day.
  #403  
Old 05-03-2019, 02:52 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
Interesting theory (sincerely, not sarcastically). How do you square Biden and Bernie with voters’ reservations about candidates over 75? Not to mention, for Bernie, socialists? I think you may have something here, but it points to Booker, not so much the other two IMO.
  #404  
Old 05-03-2019, 08:53 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,890
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Interesting theory (sincerely, not sarcastically). How do you square Biden and Bernie with votersí reservations about candidates over 75? Not to mention, for Bernie, socialists? I think you may have something here, but it points to Booker, not so much the other two IMO.
For the age thing: Age might be a barrier to the general voting public, but for these types of voters, as long as the candidate "speaks" to them, they're ok. At least that's my take right now, just thinking about Uncle G and Cousin D. Biden, old as he is, can speak their language, and can come across as tough. His past votes, how he raised money in the past, those things are less important than how he can speak to them now. Uncle G and Cousin D aren't political nerds combing The Hill, Politico and FiveThirtyEight for info, so a lot of the past details on candidates aren't as important with them, and I don't think age would be either.

For the socialist thing: This one puzzles me (and admittedly worries me, as I'm not confident it wouldn't end up being a problem with voters down the road). I would say 80% of union members I've talked to in Michigan and Ohio are 100% in the bag for Bernie (point of reference, I worked in labor for 15 years, and still have a number of friends and acquaintances in the labor movement). Donating, posting stuff on Facebook, going to hear him speak, etc. So, it would seem anyway, the socialist thing doesn't bother union people. My only worry is that the only union members I'm hearing from are the most vocal ones, who happen to support Bernie. Perhaps the less vocal ones (and maybe they outnumber the vocal ones) support someone else.

So I'm not fully sold on Bernie, but if the socialist thing doesn't become an issue, Bernie has the message and style to win the vote of Uncle G and Cousin D.

So if I were to rank my three, it would be:
1.Booker
2.Biden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Sanders
  #405  
Old 05-03-2019, 09:31 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post

Otherwise any differences? He's well educated and articulate and young and is willing to address some nuance and complexity. Is that enough? He lacks experience or appeal to important segments of Ds, D-leaners, and swingable Independents. He'd do okay keeping the Romney-Clinton voters but not appeal to many of the Obama-Trump ones or maximize Black turn-out or get Hispanic voters off their asses.

When he fades, as I think he will, who gets his support?
I'm not a Buttihead, but that seems like pretty reductionist thinking. Your assumption is that because he's young, gay, and white, that he will turn off voters who aren't? Certainly as a general rule that might be true, but we're looking for a special case here. The candidate we want is one who can get support from voters who they don't have an obvious demographic affinity for. Buttigieg's performance thus far suggests we can't rule out the possibility that he might be the guy.
  #406  
Old 05-03-2019, 09:36 AM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Though as I've made clear I personally have little time for any candidate whose "process" for getting to single-payer health care is more complicated than "pass a law implementing single-payer health care".

Anecdotally, my parents (lifelong union members from the Midwest) aren't following the race closely but are quite impressed with Buttigieg. Last time they were for Bernie, but now they think he's too old.
  #407  
Old 05-03-2019, 09:48 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,785
No. Not turn them off but not particularly turn them on either. That is not based on identity alone. Oh identity can help but more so is a track record of support, performance, and being able to speak to and with the populations in ways that resonate, or evidence that those populations are currently resonating with him.

Obama-Trump voters are not most motivated by climate change or impressed by being well-educated (in fact some may be suspicious of the well-educated and have an anti-intellectual streak). Biden has very strong approval among Black Democrats, much stronger than the current Black candidates do. And nothing has seemed to get Hispanic voters to flex the substantial muscle they have but I don't see anything that Mayor Pete brings to possibly change that.

I'm willing to be convinced otherwise but not being able to rule it out isn't enough. To me the burden of proof is the other way.
  #408  
Old 05-03-2019, 09:52 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,785
To make clear (and have stated elsewhere). I have Biden as my default but am looking and hoping for someone more exciting to displace him on their strengths. But I need to be convinced of those strengths, not just think they are not ruled out as being present.
  #409  
Old 05-03-2019, 12:10 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
I'm not trying to convince you to support him -- I'm not an enthusiast myself. Just saying that I don't see any particular reason to assume that he's going to "fade" in the short to medium term.
  #410  
Old 05-03-2019, 04:57 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
I'm not a Buttihead, but that seems like pretty reductionist thinking. Your assumption is that because he's young, gay, and white, that he will turn off voters who aren't? Certainly as a general rule that might be true, but we're looking for a special case here. The candidate we want is one who can get support from voters who they don't have an obvious demographic affinity for. Buttigieg's performance thus far suggests we can't rule out the possibility that he might be the guy.

What performance? Cracking double digits in some polls, thanks almost entirely to enthusiasm from college-educated white liberals?
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc

Last edited by SlackerInc; 05-03-2019 at 04:58 PM.
  #411  
Old 05-03-2019, 07:07 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
I'm not trying to convince you to support him -- I'm not an enthusiast myself. Just saying that I don't see any particular reason to assume that he's going to "fade" in the short to medium term.
I'd turn that around. What reason is there to think he won't fade?

What are his positions that stand out from the crowd? By positions he's a middle of the road pragmatic liberal. That won't make the strong progressives happy (many of them like you will not want to support someone who says that single payer will be a process, for example). Which of the other groups are probable to gravitate to him and why?

His support is not based on agreeing with his positions very much and not based on thinking he is the most electable or thinking he is the most qualified and skilled for the job. Nor is he exciting. I'm thinking you need at least one of those to not fade.

But I have been surprised by his getting up this high so I am open to being surprised as the process unfurls!
  #412  
Old 05-04-2019, 05:59 AM
Quartz's Avatar
Quartz is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Where haggis roam free
Posts: 30,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
What are his positions that stand out from the crowd? By positions he's a middle of the road pragmatic liberal.
So was Bill Clinton. So was Obama. For me, from what I've seen and read, beyond that, Buttigieg has the character to be a good president. He does need to exercise his charisma a bit more.
  #413  
Old 05-04-2019, 08:02 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
The fact that Pete doesn't come across as an Alpha Male would probably be the major stumbling block for both.
I disagree that he doesn't come across as an alpha male, insomuch as this quality can be measured. It's true that he has some things working against him. His extremely boyish appearance, for one, and his single-name moniker of "Pete" makes me think of Pete Campbell from Mad Men, who most fans of that show would agree is the exact opposite of an alpha male. Nevertheless - Pete has some things going for him in this department. His speaking voice, for one, which sounds more like Don Draper; his complete conviction in whatever he's talking about; the fact that he is extremely at ease with himself and everything he says no matter what the audience is, a very cool and collected sense of confidence (which, again, is aided by his excellent speaking voice); and the fact that he served in the military.

Yeah Trump might come up with some stupid belittling nickname for him. Pete should probably just ignore this on the campaign trail. But if he wound up on the debate stage and Trump throws it at him, he should just say "I served in Afghanistan. I wore the uniform. What the hell did you do?" The crowd would probably burst into applause, Trump would be momentarily thrown off, and then Pete should just shake his head with a look of disgust as the audience takes the exchange in. I think that would yield a pretty favorable counterattack.
  #414  
Old 05-04-2019, 09:25 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quartz View Post
So was Bill Clinton. So was Obama. For me, from what I've seen and read, beyond that, Buttigieg has the character to be a good president. He does need to exercise his charisma a bit more.
Yes, having Bill Clinton or Barack Obama level of charisma and oratory skills, that ability to connect, is a possible path to not fading (and is one of the desired qualifications for the job that occupies the big bully pulpit).

And Buttigieg speaks well ... but that level of well?
  #415  
Old 05-04-2019, 09:58 AM
Covfefe's Avatar
Covfefe is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
His support is not based on agreeing with his positions very much and not based on thinking he is the most electable or thinking he is the most qualified and skilled for the job. Nor is he exciting. I'm thinking you need at least one of those to not fade.
I think electability has everything to do with it, from a standpoint of risk aversion. His presence is like a prospective safety valve amidst those candidates who are inherently seriously flawed or are presently campaigning with rhetoric that won't translate well to some swing states in the general. Certainly he isn't all that safe looking in the grand scheme of things. Imagine if a fortune teller had told you 4 years ago Donald Trump would become the Republican president in 2016 and his most electable 2020 challenger with Hillary being out of the picture would be a gay mayor of a town in his 30s who isn't too popular among blacks with the last name Buttigieg. Relative to the others, it is looking like a possibility.

O'Rourke could in theory be occupying that space, so we'll see if he rebounds (as much as his style clashes with my personal sensibilities). Do you think O'Rourke is that much more exciting that he is not similarly (likely) destined to fade?
  #416  
Old 05-04-2019, 10:20 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,785
I think O'Rourke has already faded.
  #417  
Old 05-04-2019, 12:10 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 14,890
I don't think anyone that had the early fundraising haul that Beto did should actually be counted out before we even have the first debate. One or two really good performances on the big stage can jumpstart, or re-jumpstart, a campaign pretty quickly.

Last edited by Happy Lendervedder; 05-04-2019 at 12:11 PM.
  #418  
Old 05-04-2019, 04:00 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
Agreed.

On the "alpha male" front*, did anyone see Jay Inslee on Bill Maher last night? I had already been kind of impressed by him, but while I thought he was a good, classic-style politician, I had previously taken him to not be really physically imposing or anything. I guess I had just seen him already seated at the MTP table or that kind of thing? Because when he strode out on stage, I was like "whoa". Not just tall, but athletic-looking. I couldn't find anything on Google about his height, but I did discover he was the quarterback of his high school football team, and was also a basketball standout who played in Obama's notoriously competitive "pickup" game. That really does give him some extra juice, and he should try to show off that physicality when possible.

*Which I want to note makes me queasy, but which I also acknowledge may be a queasiness we all have to just suck it up and deal with to handle the clear and present danger in the WH.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: https://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #419  
Old 05-06-2019, 02:34 PM
Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
For the age thing: Age might be a barrier to the general voting public, but for these types of voters, as long as the candidate "speaks" to them, they're ok. At least that's my take right now, just thinking about Uncle G and Cousin D. Biden, old as he is, can speak their language, and can come across as tough. His past votes, how he raised money in the past, those things are less important than how he can speak to them now. Uncle G and Cousin D aren't political nerds combing The Hill, Politico and FiveThirtyEight for info, so a lot of the past details on candidates aren't as important with them, and I don't think age would be either.

For the socialist thing: This one puzzles me (and admittedly worries me, as I'm not confident it wouldn't end up being a problem with voters down the road). I would say 80% of union members I've talked to in Michigan and Ohio are 100% in the bag for Bernie (point of reference, I worked in labor for 15 years, and still have a number of friends and acquaintances in the labor movement). Donating, posting stuff on Facebook, going to hear him speak, etc. So, it would seem anyway, the socialist thing doesn't bother union people. My only worry is that the only union members I'm hearing from are the most vocal ones, who happen to support Bernie. Perhaps the less vocal ones (and maybe they outnumber the vocal ones) support someone else.

So I'm not fully sold on Bernie, but if the socialist thing doesn't become an issue, Bernie has the message and style to win the vote of Uncle G and Cousin D.

So if I were to rank my three, it would be:
1.Booker
2.Biden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Sanders
I had this discussion regarding union members and PA/OH/MI/WI with someone here--might've been you! Anyway, gist is that regardless of what support he might have gotten from the union people you know, Sanders didn;t actually do all that well in these states during the 2016 primaries. If you look at the "Midwestern" states that Obama won in 2012 and Trump took in '16:

+Sanders won the Wisconsin primary with room to spare,
+barely won the Michigan primary,
+barely lost the Iowa caucus,
+lost Ohio handily,
+and lost PA handily.

On the whole, a net negative.

So while he did better in this region than he did in the South, or in California, or in the area around DC, it wasn't as though he was on fire among primary voters in these states. Certainly he lagged behind his performance in the Pacific Northwest, or the Great Plains, or New England. Those 100% in the bag for Bernie voters didn't really help all that much.

Which leads me to think that you were talking to a skewed sample, as you mention might've been the case, and that the bulk of blue-collar union guys either stayed home or preferred Clinton; or that the influence of men like your cousin and uncle is overblown and the key voters are now, I dunno, older women, or racial minorities, or tech workers, or health care employees, or some combination of the above. I did read today that Clinton beat Sanders among union members almost 2 to 1 in the primaries, though of course "unions" includes a lot more than just "traditional blue-collar jobs."

All of which is to say, I don't think Sanders is the "answer" in those states, and I'm not so sure Biden is either! Guess we'll see how things shake out.
  #420  
Old 05-06-2019, 06:51 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 82,666
I think a lot of Democratic primary voters went with Clinton because they believed her to be more electable than Sanders. They may or may not have been right, but it turns out that, in any event, she wasn't electable enough. In any event, though, level of support in a primary is not the same thing as level of support in a general election.
  #421  
Old 05-06-2019, 10:32 PM
Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
I think a lot of Democratic primary voters went with Clinton because they believed her to be more electable than Sanders. They may or may not have been right, but it turns out that, in any event, she wasn't electable enough. In any event, though, level of support in a primary is not the same thing as level of support in a general election.
Probably true, but immaterial in this case: my post is a response to Happy Lendervedder's note that s/he encountered many union members who loved Sanders back in 2016. Clearly those folks are not going to be voting for Clinton in a primary. I'm just saying there weren't enough of them in the key Midwestern states to give Sanders much traction; he did much better in several other parts of the country with different demographics. It's hard to square these results with the notion that Sanders had huge and enthusiastic support among the union rank and file in these states.
  #422  
Old 05-07-2019, 01:40 AM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 168
I think so far it's abundantly clear that Buttigieg won't get the black vote, and probably will miss a chunk of the gay vote because he's not gay enough for some people, and this is before counting women who won't vote for a man. Or the actual likelihood that the DNC will once again shoot themselves in the foot and vote for Biden, as flawed and dumb he can be.
  #423  
Old 05-07-2019, 10:47 AM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOJA View Post
probably will miss a chunk of the gay vote because he's not gay enough for some people

what's that supposed to mean exactly?
  #424  
Old 05-07-2019, 10:54 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
I think O'Rourke has already faded.
I donít think heís faded yet, but I think he will fade before (if) Mayor Pete does. When Beto does fade, I think more of his supporters will go to Mayor Pete than any other candidate. That should help push any fading further into the future, by which time some of the candidates in other lanes will also have faded.
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 03:52 AM.

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