Democrats haven’t had that kind of candidate since Clinton.
Obama won the first time in a guaranteed Dem win cycle and the second time he faced off against the most unlikeable GOP nominee possibly ever.
I think you’re underselling the charisma of Obama by quite a lot.
He would have lost reelection to a better than average GOP candidate.
Clinton had multiple major scandals and was untouchable in 1996.
And overstating how unlikeable Mitt is. I get that he’s a rich white dude, but guys like ANGRY BOB DOLE! and nerdy dweeb Bush Sr were probably more “unlikeable”. I don’t know, Mitt doesn’t seem that bad. He’s probably more Bland Median Rich Republican Guy than Oh I Hate That Guy.
How soon we forget:
Romney was leading in polls until then I think?
Anyway, even if I give you guys Obama the point still stands there’s no one the Dems can run that isn’t shit.
2 Likes
Well, you ain’t gonna get any pushback from me on that.
1 Like
There are some Dems I think would be compelling but none of them have a chance against the eDem fossil / media tag team.
You might be right because the appealing Dems are ones we never hear about because the media is very unlikely to participate in any effort to promote them as an exciting candidate. AOC is objectively the most exciting progressive politician possible, and she is never framed as a viable leader for the party/country. She gets the most attention and it’s all to position her as a Radical Provocateur. Like the Alex Jones of the left!
3 Likes
Oh I remember that. I just don’t think that makes him inherently more unlikeable than other Republicans. They’re all assholes.
Nothing to see here
https://www.reddit.com/r/florida/comments/uyjaez/this_is_the_newly_appointed_secretary_of_state/
I’m genuinely asking here, but why is Beto shit?
It seems to me that he can’t win a general because he’s too liberal (AOC has the same problem).
Is there more wrong with Beto than that?
Lost to ted cruz
DUI
“hell yeah we’re taking your guns”
and last but not least:
beto
1 Like
In TX, though. GOATBama or Bill Clinton couldn’t beat Cruz in TX today.
I forgot about that. Not ideal, I’ll give you that one.
This is good, right. It might make him unelectable because it’s too liberal, but I don’t think it makes him shit.
Not sure exactly what this means, but I can’t think of an interpretation that makes him “shit”.
1 Like
Beto is the inferior version of Jason Kander, who probably was the best chance to do what you want but he quit politics it seems.
Beto just doesn’t strike me as really having “it.”
No one is pumped to go vote for Beto.
1 Like
I think that’s mostly because he’s a loser, which is because he keeps running in TX.
The strategically correct play for him would have been to move a few miles west to NM. Go for Senator or Gov there and then make a play for Pres after that.
You need people like Beto in TX to do the hard work of trying to flip that state blue in the long term and purple in the short term. Him doing that is more important than winning an election in NM that another Dem is fully capable of winning.
Part of the issue the Dems face is they throw away too many races running shit candidates. Having people who can speak well to liberal policies in red states helps shift things to the left. See Stacy Abrams in Georgia.
7 Likes
Yeah, Beto contesting in TX is probably better for everybody. But Beto going up the ranks in NM would have been better for him.
And if we truly are so devoid of an good presidential candidate, then maybe this alternative reality Beto really is better for everybody. But I think that’s unlikely.
1 Like
Nobody has Newsom on their bingo card?
Presiding over the largest surplus in the history of the country, defeated a recall by a massive amount, strong rhetorically on guns and ammo, pretty sure he is for socialized medicine. Young compared to the fucking ghouls currently on the D team.
I get he has problems, and the right despise him, but he is fairly charismatic and clearly on our side the majority of the time