Given that the blue wave didn’t occur as was hoped for, what does that mean for 2020 elections? It appears that wins in the house that gave Democrats control, came from mainly suburban districts that Trump won in 2016, but swung back primarily in response from independent/moderate voters that want some sort of balance in congress against the current administration. This doesn’t sound like a mandate for progressivism and support for a far left agenda.
So will the Democratic party lean towards a progressive agenda, ala Sanders/Warren, or will they shift to a more moderate position in the form of Bullock (Montana) or Hickenlooper (Colorado)?
In my opinion, they need to become more centrist, if they wish to beat Trump.
O’Rourke and Warren, both present themselves as more progressive. O’ Rourke was originally more moderate, but shifted to more progressive in his run in Texas. Why do you think a far left progressive ticket is the way Democrats can win the White House?
The problem with the old dichotomy is, the GOP has gone so far to the right, that what most progressives are pushing isn’t particularly radical, and sounds good to most people. Whether it’s a higher minimum wage, Medicare for All, or treating blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Muslims, and LGBTQ people like freakin’ human beings, the progressive agenda is attractive to most people. All it needs is an attractive candidate who can make a simple, straightforward case for it.
O’Rourke’s run in Texas proves his wide appeal, and he’s got the charisma and intelligence to make an exciting candidate. He can position himself as more centrist over the next few years, while Warren represents the more progressive wing. Military background is nice, but who was the last successful presidential candidate who had military service (real military service, not National Guard)? Bush the elder? John Kerry and John McCain both had impeccable military credetials but didn’t win.
There is no magic formula. Dinos like McCaskill & Donnelly lost while cosplaying as conservatives, and those who ran as unapologetic liberals like Gillum & O’Rourke lost as well.
Anyone who tells you otherwise is delusional. Democrats will vote for democrats, republicans will vote for republicans, and the moronic middle will vote for whoever Facebook algorithms or Russian bots tell them to.
The only hope for 2020 is for Democrats to nominate someone who turns out the base, and who has such overwhelming charisma & likability that they could weather massive Internet disinformation campaigns & voter suppression.
Bernie Sanders remains the most well-liked politician in the country, btw.
Elections have nothing to do with policy anymore. It’s about soundbites, cutdowns and who owned who in the debates. The Dems only hope is Al Franken. He has the household name, policy understanding, experience in government and the mental quickness to own Trump in a debate. He can goad out the worst in Trump and maybe, finally bring on a total meltdown where Trump proves that he is unhinged.
Nobody is listening when you talk about how your healthcare policy is zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Someone who is good on TV. Since at least Reagan, and probably before, the winner of the Presidential election has been the candidate who performs better on TV.
A candidate that can win the Clinton states plus PA, WI, and MI. That’s it. That’s why even if the blue wave didn’t materialize in IN, MO, and FL it doesn’t really matter too much as long as it manifests in pretty small swings in those three states. Note that the Democratic candidate won two statewide elections in each of those states last night.
I would recommend Dems look pretty hard at the profiles of the candidates that did well in those states this time around (Stabenow/Whitmer in MI, Baldwin/Evans and Casey/Wolf in PA).
For me the big takeaway from 2016 is that Democrats need to stop focusing on the “big wave” white whales of TX, FL, etc and be laser focused on those thin margins that are likely to decide 2018.
Ideally sqeaky clean, unflappable and personable with a quick self deprecating wit. Basically someone who can laugh off the insults and barbs will inevitably be thrown at him/her and still seem like a nice guy.
It would be nice if the Democrats would nominate someone who is truly anti-war like Tulsi Gabbard. She’s still a relative newbie though. Hopefully DC won’t taint her.
Sounds like many of you are thinking about candidates that appeal to you personally, as opposed to candidates that have the appeal to win the election. And that means more than winning the popular vote, it means winning in states that can be turned. I do think a woman candidate with broad appeal could do this (Hillary didn’t have broad enough appeal), in much the same way Obama had broad appeal. I know many people that voted for him, not because they agreed with his politics, but because they wanted to see the first African American in office.
Last night Amy Klobuchar won her race in Minnesota with 60% of the vote. Fellow incumbent Dem senator Tina Smith won with 53% of the vote yesterday, so obviously there exists some sort of broad appeal that is unique to Klobuchar. She even won Trump counties.
I don’t believe a level-headed moderate Dem is the key to the White House in 2020, but if I did, Klobuchar would be the no-brainer choice to test that theory. Being a woman could make her path in the primaries easier too.
On ideology, moderate is better than liberal, but I think the most important antidote to Trump is likeability and authenticity. Unfortunately for Democrats, their most likeable and authentic candidates lost last night because of ideology. So, I still say Joe Biden is the best answer.
Which states? PA, WI, and MI? Or IN, MO, and FL? Don’t know about the others but I believe Indiana only had one statewide contest and the Democrat lost (Senator Donnelly).
I agree on selecting someone more from the center. The 40% that always vote straight D or straight R are going to remain - it’s that 20% that will make the difference. They need to appeal to that 20%, and not only to the base - which means move center. Here is what I think the Dem 2020 candidate needs to be:
White*
Male*
Charismatic - good looking and confident wont hurt
Like-able
Lacking “baggage”
Appearance of bi-partisanship (e.g. co-authoring a bill with a Republican)
From the mid-west or south/a flyover state (to avoid that “coastal elite” label)
Focus on the economy, trade, health care (where the GOP can be weak) and not LGBT, immigration, and guns (where those 20% people may perceive the Dems to be weak).
Some government experience at the state level - a proven record of successes in government
Be willing to go toe-to-toe with Trump and his supporters and call them out on their lies
*Do you want to make a point, or win the election? Obama being elected was the confluence of some very specific circumstances of the time - may not be able to duplicate at this point or in near future. And let’s face it, the US is not going to be ready for a female POTUS in 2020.
There are essentially two different Americas: a diverse urban and metropolitan America, and a mostly white rural America. The latter is outnumbered, but they’re unified. Elections aren’t really a competition for ideas, but a competition to see which America can inspire more of its voters to show up and vote.