He'll be in first for a few weeks until endless loops of the shit he's said is all over TV.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US PoliEra 2019 |OT3| YOU WERE AT MY WEDDING, DENISE
- Thread starter Ogodei
- Start date
- Status
Biden is the current frontrunner. As mentioned he has not announced yet leads all polls. He will presumably have the most endorsements on top of that and will not lack for funding. At all. Things can change (see the Romney 2008 example) but you're basically counting on someone to really break out in a debate OR for Biden to self sabotage to stop that campaign. Beto isn't going to be the guy that does this- we've already seen him against Cruz and debate is not his strong point.
Contrast that to Harris and Booker in the Kavanaugh hearing, or Harris just dismantling the audience member that tried to misrepresent her career as a prosecutor in the CNN town hall. Those two are complete sharks.
"Beto has almost certainly lost the south" isn't really a hot take at all. Beto isn't some unknown, the dude had massive amounts of media exposure thanks to the Texas Senate race which had national attention. Only the democratic die hards vote in primaries- the vast majority know who Beto is at this point. I would even hazard he's the third best known candidate in the race at this point after Biden and Sanders, who are known quantities with very few people on the fence.
a 12% rate with Black Democrats given all that is a BAD thing, and it's not any more a hot take to say Beto is going to struggle in the black belt and probably lose it, than it is to say he's going to struggle in California, Minnesota, or Vermont. The odds are heavily stacked against him and spending your resources on an uphill climb rather than in states that are much more winnable is common sense. I wouldn't expect Sanders to spend much time if at all in those areas either for the exact same reasons.
People thinking that a clip of Biden being too handsy with some woman or him saying something racist 30 years ago will suddenly sink him are going to be in for a rude awakening. The only thing that can stop Biden is death by a thousand paper cuts because no one is going to really care about any one thing.
But whatever keep your head in the sand.
But whatever keep your head in the sand.
No, I've said debates don't matter (outside of gaffes), and I stick by that.
Given how people are astonished at his stamina and fundraising, I would say he's still very unknown.
It's a year away.
Good thing there's a shitload of paper for Bernie Bros to cut him with then.
Anita Hill shit will hit hard today.
Based on his numbers, I can't see a world where Biden loses to Trump, especially after he kicks his ass in debates (if we got there that is)
Yeah if the Beto rollout has taught us anything it's not to trust this thread's shit political takes.
I hope Biden avoids PACs if only because that's going to be insufferable if he is the nominee.
I just want to add that I'm eating hella crow for thinking Beto messed up by not announcing earlier. I thought he wasted the potential off his Senate run but I was wrong these fundraising numbers are crazy and the dude is standing on different tables in like 3 states at once somehow
This is a nonsensical position to take regarding primary debates, since history has shown the exact opposite is true, and I've given several examples.
Even with Romney as the 2012 frontrunner (and eventual winner) debates ping ponged support all over the place and dragged out the primary LONG past what anyone expected. At various points Gingrich, Perry, and even Herman Cain took the lead position over Romney BECAUSE of debates, and if not for Romney outspending them 20 to 1 in some cases he would have lost 2012 just as he lost 2008.
edit:
Looking at that and saying "debates don't matter" is nonsense.
double edit:
Presidential Primary Debates Can Make And Break a Campaign.
Primary debates ABSOLUTELY matter. 2016 was probably the only one that didn't, since no one seriously expected Hillary to lose that race to Sanders.
The General? yes, different story because it's a different audience.
Last edited:
I'm only talking about the primary. Biden would be very likely to beat Trump in a general.
Well I think we're all just so clued into this stuff when most voters aren't paying much mind to any of this.
Like the debates aren't until June and even that's seven months out from the first caucus.
Trump's inanity is probably getting more people to tune in sooner but even then it won't make that big of a difference.
Of the main candidates, I can't see a world where any of them loses to Trump.
But then I remember 2016 and I want to cower under a blanket.
Beto is only doomed in the south if he takes Bernie's cue of writing off the entire region as red states that wouldn't vote for him anyway (which, given where he's from and how he became politically famous, would be hilariously ironic!). The idea that Beto's standing among black voters in the south being irrevocable just doesn't ring true to me. Which is not to say he won't be able to appreciably change his numbers there at all. But given he only started campaigning literally a few days ago, and has not been to any state but Iowa yet, it just seems extremely premature to say he's DOA in the south.
Re: Biden -- I've said this before, when we were talking about that Twitter thread of a Dem pollster talking to black women voters in SC, but I think the degree to which Biden's track record will be successfully weaponized against him will be vastly overshadowed by the fact that he was Obama's vice president. And nobody is going to believe Biden is racist because of things he's said (e.g. segregation) or done (e.g. crime bill) in the past when he was the #2 to the country's first black president. I agree the Anita Hill hearings will hurt the most, and that was actually backed up in that focus group, but I think Biden is stronger than he's often given credit for here, especially re: his standing with black voters. That said, I don't think he's a slam dunk either and I see plenty of reasons why black voter support would tip from Biden to Kamala. Biden, like Hillary Clinton in '08, can campaign on his long ties with the black community in states like SC...but at the end of the day, he's not black! And just like black voters delivered the '08 primary to Obama over Hillary, I think the presence of two major black candidates in this race is going to do more to eat into Biden's support than a lot of attacks on his voting record would.
Re: Biden -- I've said this before, when we were talking about that Twitter thread of a Dem pollster talking to black women voters in SC, but I think the degree to which Biden's track record will be successfully weaponized against him will be vastly overshadowed by the fact that he was Obama's vice president. And nobody is going to believe Biden is racist because of things he's said (e.g. segregation) or done (e.g. crime bill) in the past when he was the #2 to the country's first black president. I agree the Anita Hill hearings will hurt the most, and that was actually backed up in that focus group, but I think Biden is stronger than he's often given credit for here, especially re: his standing with black voters. That said, I don't think he's a slam dunk either and I see plenty of reasons why black voter support would tip from Biden to Kamala. Biden, like Hillary Clinton in '08, can campaign on his long ties with the black community in states like SC...but at the end of the day, he's not black! And just like black voters delivered the '08 primary to Obama over Hillary, I think the presence of two major black candidates in this race is going to do more to eat into Biden's support than a lot of attacks on his voting record would.
When even Jay Inslee raised a million bucks in a day (or two?) it should have been super obvious that Beto pulled in quite a bit of cash.
That said, I'm a little pessimistic on Beto's long-term chances. He's already been mocked a good bit by left-leaning outlets for his "Man, I was born to be in it" comments and I suspect he'll say a few other air-headed things between now and Iowa which is especially bad in a primary with like 7 pretty great options. It was true before and it's still true now that Buttigieg is who people think Beto is, and I think the Beto crowd will shift over to mayor Pete as time goes on. Maybe not enough for Pete to win any states, but still enough for Beto to lose them.
That said, I'm a little pessimistic on Beto's long-term chances. He's already been mocked a good bit by left-leaning outlets for his "Man, I was born to be in it" comments and I suspect he'll say a few other air-headed things between now and Iowa which is especially bad in a primary with like 7 pretty great options. It was true before and it's still true now that Buttigieg is who people think Beto is, and I think the Beto crowd will shift over to mayor Pete as time goes on. Maybe not enough for Pete to win any states, but still enough for Beto to lose them.
At least when Florida is under water maybe these idiots will actually have to work for once
It's almost like none of us really know what we are talking about and what we want isn't really indicative of what the people who actually vote a lot want
We're mostly young and young people dont have as much influence as we think we do
Most seem to think just because Trump, the outsider right winger won, that nothing matters anymore and might as well go YOLO.. but really Trump is there because the old people who vote a lot more than anyone else like him
I'm going to be honest, I don't think Buttigieg has much of a shot haha. He's great and I like him a lot but being a small town mayor really hurts his prospects out the gate.
I can appreciate why he's doing it though, Indiana isn't going to elect another statewide Democrat for a long time. I'd have to assume he's angling for a cabinet position if anything.
I don't think we necessarily disagree.
Beto isn't likely to write off the entire region as Bernie did- but he's starting way, WAY behind the 8 ball there. Is his standing irrevocable? no, but getting it to a point where it's competitive with Harris and Biden would take so much money and effort it's hard to see that being worth it.
You're also ignoring the endorsement race- both Harris and Biden both have a significant amount of the democratic establishment willing to GOTV and do the footwork and fundraising FOR them in these areas- Beto really doesn't. Again, he's well behind here and just catching up is going to be very, very difficult.
Re: Biden I agree completely. The anita hill stuff hurts him the worst, but even that was 20 something years ago and will be overshadowed by his service during the Obama campaign. I dont really see using Biden's history against him as being effective unless someone is VERY, VERY skilled at it.
also: You mention two major black candidates in the race but at present it's really just Harris. Booker hasn't done much of anything, and seems to have taken a liking to a centrist "let's all get along" position that's going to go over like a lead balloon with progressives. If he even makes it to Super Tuesday I'd be amazed, but he IS good in a debate.
There was a Buzzfeed story today about how the tsk-tsking on Twitter over Beto is not connecting with on-the-ground voters in Iowa at all. Even if they share similar concerns (e.g. lack of in-depth policy proposals) those concerns are overwhelmed by the feeling they get just listening to the guy speak.
I don't know how long you can coast on that, but he seems like he's sharpening up his answers even in just the 3 days he's been on the trail already and if nothing else, "inspiring oratory that moves people in spite of other concerns" is not a bad problem to have this early in the game!
Yes, we know. You're like 19 weeks gestational age. Stop rubbing it in on old, dusty 30-somethings.
It seems like Andrew Gillum is announcing a Presidential run on the 20th. What do y'all think of him?
I personally like Gillum. I think he'd be a really strong candidate in a year where every talented Democrat wasn't already running, but he'll probably be fighting for attention in such a crowded field.
I think it should be taken as a general rule that Twitter is more concerned about literally anything than the general public ever is. I think the overwhelming feeling from actual, irl people is that basically all the candidates are at least acceptable. It's just a matter of whether or not Beto can convince people he's the best option in a really talented field. I don't think he'll have much of a problem with being actively disliked, he'll just have an uphill battle convincing people that he's both A) more electable than Biden and B) more fine-tuned than Kamala.
I personally like Gillum. I think he'd be a really strong candidate in a year where every talented Democrat wasn't already running, but he'll probably be fighting for attention in such a crowded field.
I don't think Buttigieg will be the nominee or anything. I certainly wouldn't put money on it, anyway. I think he'll act as a spoiler for Beto though. In Iowa/New Hampshire/maybe Nevada and SC when there are still like 15 candidates in the race all you need to do is peel away a couple percent from one candidate to make the difference between their finishing 1st and finishing 3rd.
I think it should be taken as a general rule that Twitter is more concerned about literally anything than the general public ever is. I think the overwhelming feeling from actual, irl people is that basically all the candidates are at least acceptable. It's just a matter of whether or not Beto can convince people he's the best option in a really talented field. I don't think he'll have much of a problem with being actively disliked, he'll just have an uphill battle convincing people that he's both A) more electable than Biden and B) more fine-tuned than Kamala.
For sure, I get that Beto is behind there. Technically he's behind everywhere, in every way; he's only been campaigning for 3-4 days and had basically no infrastructure or pre-campaign support in place in any state. And I agree Biden and Harris are likely to outperform him across the Super Tuesday southern primaries. But I think he has plenty of time to turn it around to some degree too.
I was just trying to be fair. :lol I don't really see Booker going much of anywhere.
As much as I worry about Biden playing it so nice with Republicans, I worry Beto would make the same mistakes that Obama made in possibly thinking he could get Republican votes on big legislation pieces if he was elected.
I also question his actual knowledge on some of the top policy issues that are not Texas focused
I also question his actual knowledge on some of the top policy issues that are not Texas focused
I think this chart actually shows that debates don't matterThis is a nonsensical position to take regarding primary debates, since history has shown the exact opposite is true, and I've given several examples.
Even with Romney as the 2012 frontrunner (and eventual winner) debates ping ponged support all over the place and dragged out the primary LONG past what anyone expected. At various points Gingrich, Perry, and even Herman Cain took the lead position over Romney BECAUSE of debates, and if not for Romney outspending them 20 to 1 in some cases he would have lost 2012 just as he lost 2008.
edit:
Looking at that and saying "debates don't matter" is nonsense.
double edit:
Presidential Primary Debates Can Make And Break a Campaign.
Primary debates ABSOLUTELY matter. 2016 was probably the only one that didn't, since no one seriously expected Hillary to lose that race to Sanders.
The General? yes, different story because it's a different audience.
Romney started at the top and had a pretty linear line all the way to the nomination, while the losers bounced up and down sporadically. Romney never really lost support from debates.
Why isn't he telling that kid what his tax schemes are and what increases there will be across certain brackets? The public demands details mr dork!
I almost agree with this, but think that Biden, not Beto, fills this role. More than anything, I want a super progressive candidate to win, but the people who actually get out and vote are older and more moderate, and those people are the ones who are going to do the most to dictate the direction of the party. Both Beto and Biden are super vanilla, dictionary definition 'generic Democrat' candidates - both seen as extensions of, rather than departures from, the Obama administration - and frankly that's what a lot of the Democratic voters who get out to the polls in a general election actually want.
In a perfect world, a Mayor Pete or Bernie Sanders would get the nomination, but the real world heavily leans toward a Biden or Beto in the role.
It's still weird to me that Santorum was the runner-up in 2012 and then relegated to the kid's table in 2016. I would say it has something to do with GOP being especially averse to "losers" but Romney was the runner-up in '08 soooo...
People here have underrated Beto
MASSIVELY underrated Biden
and overrated Mayor Pete
(as people with a legit chance at the nomination)
I dont think anyone here actually think Pete has any real shot at the nomination. I do think hes going to impress people enough that in 8-12 years he is looked at as a potential front runner especially if he gets a cabinet position
Also, McCain in 2000.
Santorum lost his edge. Cruz bit into his crazy christian edge and Trump his xenophobic/general asshole edge.
Who has ever thought Pete could win?
There's only been four possibilities from the beginning: Biden, Beto, Bernie or Kamala.
This ignores context. Romney was the best known out of the gate thanks to his 2008 run- he was pretty much in the same position Sanders and Biden are now, only everyone else running was literally a joke candidate with no business running for office.
Rick Perry immediately jumped over romney as soon as he was officially "in," but a string of bizarre debate performances due to drugs and a back problem tanked his campaign literally on stage. Remember the "oops" moment when he couldn't remember what departments he'd like to eliminate? Yeah, that was then.
Herman Cain jumped in front of Romney (again, thanks to debate performances) once Perry flamed out- but HIS campaign went straight to hell when a parade of women accusing him of sexual assault came out of nowhere.
Newt Gingrich took over the #1 spot from Cain (AGAIN based almost entirely on debates) but Newt was there to sell books, not actually run, and he had previously terminated his campaign before jumping back in. Newt lacked the campaign support to compete with Romney for long and predictably flamed out.
All through this, Mitt Romney was forced to outspend these dudes 10, 20, or 30-1 *just to remain competitive*. THEY were doing it just on the merit of the crazy things they said at the podium every few days.
were any of them well funded, not on drugs, or running a serious campaign debates would have killed him. And this is on top of the fact that debates DID kill Romney's campaign in 2008, When Mike Huckabee kicked his ass all over the south and Mitt came in third.
edit: and fivethirtyeight agrees with me:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/presidential-primary-debates-can-make-and-break-a-campaign/
"debates don't matter" is a nonsense position to take. every shred of data we have says otherwise, when talking about the primaries.
I believe this country is much further away from electing an openly gay man to the presidency (unfortunately)
I'm actually sort of impressed Kamala racked up as many politically unfortunate decisions in such a short period of time
Also still if that dude gets proved innocent after she refused to allow DNA testing she's megafucked. Like that's still to me the worst looming scandal I can think of out of anyone in the field unless I'm forgetting something
Also still if that dude gets proved innocent after she refused to allow DNA testing she's megafucked. Like that's still to me the worst looming scandal I can think of out of anyone in the field unless I'm forgetting something
For anyone who has a long commute and wants to reminisce back to a time when the first family didn't suck, Michelle Obama was on Conan O'Brien's podcast.
Having to compete for the evangelical vote against Huckabee, Cruz and Carson probably didn't help him. That lane was pretty much his in 2012.
Having to compete for the evangelical vote against Huckabee, Cruz and Carson probably didn't help him. That lane was pretty much his in 2012.
Well, you've got Bush losing in 80 to Reagan, then following him up (as a huge lay-up, mind you, but still). Then McCain losing 2000 to Bush 43, and being the nominee in 08, then Romney losing to McCain in 08 and coming up in 12.
Republicans have long given second chances to also-rans.
- Status