Again, the Republican guy is giving bad advice. He is forgetting Bill Clinton.
That answer is given so often it really should be pointed out that it’s stupid. The idea that only people emotionally invested in a positive outcome can get it right is silly. As often as your base as screwed it up with dumb choices in the past, you’d think listening to outsiders a little might be valuable. “We need a veteran! That’ll show those chickenhawks! No way Bush will be reelected if we just nominate a veteran!” “Ummm, maybe you need Joe Lieberman” “Shut up, neocon!”
The Clinton coalition was most definitely NOT the Obama coalition. Clinton won young voters and minorities, but they did not come out for him in huge numbers like they did for Obama. Clinton’s path to victory was a very old one: elderly voters and white working class voters.
https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups-voted-1992/
65 and over were the only voters to give CLinton 50%. And he lost white voters by only 2 points to Bush. As income rose, Clinton’s support fell. The modern Democratic Party now relies heavily on affluent voters.
Clinton even won vets, something it would be hard to see any Democrat doing post-Clinton.
Meanwhile, Bush crushed it among Asian voters, whereas the modern Democratic Party tends to win Asian voters handily.
Because you want the Dems to put in a bad candidate. You shouldn’t even be in this thread, honestly every post you make here is bordering on threadshitting.
That statement is just ignorant. I’m actually a Biden fan, and few here think he’s a bad candidate. If I want Democrats to lose, my first suggestion would be to trot out Hillary again, or elevate someone who actually lost an election in a Democratic wave year, which some rather silly Democrats are advocating.
It may be that getting turnout to Obama '12 levels (66.6%) would require a Black candidate, but the trend before Obama had already been increasing turnout within that demographic. Black turnout in '16 (and '04) near 60% was not Obama level but it was higher turnout than is typically seen for whites without college education (usually about 55 to 58%).
If you are going argue that “the people who actually vote regularly” are those “you need to win” then it aint whites with no college education. It is college educated whites, especially female ones, then Blacks. And Black turnout has held up in midterms. Conversely the lower the education level the lower the turnout.
Reality is though that while they are a decreasing majority there are still a lot of lesser educated whites out there. And independent of gerrymandering structural features give them power in excess of numbers - in Senate seats, in the House, and in key states.
I gotta say if anything borders on threadshitting ad hominem attacks in lieu of responding to actual contributions made is it.
This is bordering on Junior Modding. If you suspect someone is threadshitting, please report the post rather than take this tact publicly.
Same comment.
Generally barring specific instruction otherwise, anyone has the ability to post to any topic as long as they are civil.
[/moderating]
That is not ad hominem. DrDeth is not saying to adaher “you are an idiot”, he is saying “your posts are idiotic and counterproductive”. Which is prettymuch the case.
He quite clearly said that adaher was posting in bad faith. No other way to interpret it. But this exchange has already been moderated so no point discussing it further.
I think Biden running with a strong VP candidate like a Sherrod Brown, would make a good ticket. Make America sane again could be the campaign slogan.
I actually like Biden for President, so it’s not threadshitting for me to make my contribution, unless only Democrats are allowed to like Biden. In which case he’s sure to lose, because no election is ever won with just Democratic voters. Not even in Massachusetts.
Biden has adopted a nice-looking rescue dog*, which should give him an advantage over the dogless Trump.
*lots better than those foofy Portuguese water dogs that Obama paraded around.
Independence & Dems can win many elections.
Yes they can. And the way I see it, they aren’t looking for the hot new person the progressive base fell in love with even when they aren’t even sure who the person is. I’m not sure progressive activists care, actually, they want a list of position on the issues. Hardcore conservatives are the same way. Independents are generally just looking for somebody they think they can trust.
Nah, it would have to be someone younger/browner/prettier. That’s why Booker is the perfect match (with a midway switcheroo!) I’m telling y’all. 
Besides, “BiBo 2020” has all kinds of potential.
ETA: “BoBi 2024!”
he’s viewed as Obama version 2 , like Bush Sr. was Reagan version 2.
I see as Biden’s greatest strength the fact that the far right has NOT spent the last ten or twenty years spreading conspiracy theories about him, such as saying that he is responsible for several dozen murders or that he committed treason on numerous occasions. I hate to say it, but that’s why Hillary lost. There were millions of voters who were convinced that she had so much smoke that there must be fire and therefore they absolutely could not vote for her even if the alternative was a con artist slash TV show host. I’m not saying all Trump voters fit that description. But I personally talked to about a dozen Trump voters and more than half of them said Hillary was basically a cross between Satan and Hitler. One of them was a co-worker that I had known for several years. He was convinced that Hillary belonged in prison or in the cemetery. No amount of facts or logic could get him to budge an inch. He would show me videos about Hillary, I would debunk the video, and he’d still be convinced that it was true anyway. Biden has the advantage that those videos weren’t about him. At least, not yet.