The 25 year incumbent who won by 4.5% (during a “blue wave”) was entirely beatable?
I don’t know how he’d have to spin this in the primaries. “I’m great at bipartisanship!” probably isn’t the ticket in 2020.
Yeah, he was. Upton was always listed as vulnerable leading up to the election.
The fact that he won by 4.5% doesn’t say anything at all about whether he was beatable.
What does?
And you’re arguing this here because…?
Or, I’m not getting drawn in by another CarnalK sidetrack that completely misses the point of the original post.
Oh fuck it.
You want to know what shows he was beatable? Polls. Leading up to the damn election, Matt Longjohn was shown to be within striking range of knocking off Upton. The fact that Longjohn DIDN’T win doesn’t mean that BEFORE the election, people didn’t see Upton as vulnerable and beatable.
A gay white man or any gay man is going to be a really, really hard sell for black Dems, in my opinion. African-Americans seem to me to be more parochial on issues like homosexuality, in the main, than white Democrats. It may be related to higher levels of religious observance, I’m not sure, but it does seem to exist.
Per your link, the explanation seems to be “Because I was paid $200,000 to do so”.
Holy shit. That’s terrible. Can I assume that all the people who despise Bernie Sanders for not being a “loyal Democrat” will now be calling for Biden to drop out of the race?
Per this 538 article, he won re-election with 80% of the vote in a city that’s 46% minority, so it doesn’t seem to have been a big problem for him.
Black support for gay marriage is currently at 51%, as opposed to 73% among Democrats. The last time the question was polled, in 2015, only 14% of Democrats said they wouldn’t consider voting for a gay Presidential candidate. 14% isn’t nothing, but it doesn’t seem like an insurmountable obstacle. Among the younger and hipper Democratic voters, gayness could actually be an advantage. It seems like a lot of Democrats think we need to nominate a white man, while a lot of others really want a minority candidate. Here’s a guy who could qualify as both! And being gay definitely won’t hurt his fundraising from the Hollywood crowd.
I’m actually feeling kind of excited about him. My initial response was “Mayor of South Bend, Indiana? Next.”, which I imagine will be the initial response of most voters. But he checks a lot of boxes that people are looking for in the 2020 candidate:
He’s young, he’s from the Rust Belt, he has an extremely impressive track record of both winning elections and governing effectively, he’s a veteran, he has experience successfully campaigning in minority communities, and he seems to be well liked and respected by both the progressive and establishment wings of the Party (a fairly impressive political achievement in itself!).
He wasn’t within striking range “leadng up to tbe election”. A Dem leaning poll company had a big swing in their numbers. And quite clearly, their polling wasn’t so great.
Look, I clearly agreed with you that this is a problem for Biden, something that he’ll have ti explain. So I don’t get why you felt the need to get into bitchy mode with me.
Here’s the 538 page for the actual district we’re talking about:
Aug R +6.9
Sep R +6.1
Oct R +6.0
Then within 10 days of the election we get one company put out +3.6R and on the eve of the election +.5D. Off by 5 points on the actual results. You’re buying into that.
Wow, you really put a lot of work into debating a parenthetical aside that has no real bearing on anything being discussed. Well done.
Regarding Buttigeig: I think he’ll bring an interesting perspective to the debate stage, but I’d be surprised if he went anywhere besides a short list for veep. If we end up with a mayor for president, I don’t see it being a South Bend mayor. But honestly, I don’t see any mayor making it to the top of the ticket.
The Republican record for most candidates entering the presidential fray was 17 (the last cycle); what’s the Democratic record? It seems like we’re already getting halfway to a football team roster.
No, it was actually pretty simple to look up the reality. You should try it.
And they all took turns as the Flavor of the Week, getting each of them some actual examination and prompt dismissal as unqualified, letting the others gang up on them in debates, until it was down to “Ohmygod, he’s really going to win, isn’t he?”
There’s a nice short video for Pete Buttigieg here: Pete Buttigieg Official Website
That ad was not great. Lots of generational identity, not lots of policy. With all the shots of him in fatigues, I actually thought, “So what, he’s the gay Tom Cotton?” Which is unfair, but that’s because it’s a pretty weak and superficial ad.
Not a very good football team.
Obviously, though, a campaign that takes him from “small city mayor” to “short list for veep” would be a huge success. I agree with you about mayors in general.
Question: if almost winning an election in a red State is now enough to qualify you as a Presidential candidate, why aren’t people talking about Stacy Abrams?
Well a) it’s not enough. He probably isn’t running and it would be a bad idea. He mainly got famous for his robust campaigning and fundraising not for almost winning .
And b) Beto was at least a US Congressman not a state one.