Who will run in 2020?

Yeah Yang and Bernie both steal a ton of Trump voters. They appeal to the anti establishment crowd who basically went 100% Trump. And you know what? They got what they wanted. They wanted to throw a hand grenade at the Washington DC establishment and it’s hard to argue that he hasn’t blown some shit up. Just look at our foreign policy situation.

Trump was a horse head in the bed of the establishments of both parties. Wake up and help out the median voter or the median voter will start breaking things.

The mixing of Bernie->Trump voters and “purity testing” is absolute bullshit. Of course people to the left of Bernie support Bernie. He’s the left flank of Dem candidates. Of course people to the left of Bernie hate the Democratic party. It is a right wing party. But the Bernie->Trump voter is a libertarian leaning voter who hates both parties. They generally rail against “pc culture” and “leftists” almost as much as pure Trump voters. That’s where you get people who liked both Bernie and Trump.

4 Likes

Blaming Bernie for ‘losing’ voters he narrowly stole from the gop to begin with is really bad analysis and it tilts me hard honestly.

This is right I think. There has always been an anti-establishment vote, for instance it 92 it went with Perot and maybe got Clinton elected, 2008 went for Obama. It pretty clearly won Trump the rust belt.

UK just demonstrated that holding power and being the epitome of the establishment doesn’t necessarily preclude one from co-opting that vote. In 2020 these votes will split between Trump and Bernie if he’s the nominee, and all Trump if not.

Then the US economy has never been strong in US history. Republicans basically tried the “everything sucks don’t believe the numbers” argument against Obama in 2012 and it didn’t really work. Unlike Obama, most of the country really hates Trump. You shouldn’t need to change the rules of what counts as a good economy to get people to vote against him.

Cite please. I STRONGLY suspect that the basic impulse is to avoid loss rather than maximize gain, as you suggested, on a genetic level. I’m somewhat aware of studies that show this in several settings and aware of none that don’t.

Doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t strive for the latter, but I think in terms of “lizard brain thinking” the data is pretty clear. I’d be happy to see studies that suggest otherwise.

MM MD

A lot of things are different now that they were decades ago. I think it’s mostly tied up in increased housing/healthcare/education costs.

This specifically is what I was referring to. I wouldn’t call it settled or definitive or anything, but I read about it and it basically matched my experiences of humanity.

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rspb.2015.1360

Then how do you explain the 2018 midterm turnout? Highest midterm turn out since 1914(!). Seems like a ton of low turnout voters turned out for mostly boilerplate dem candidates.

Oh that’s the Donald effect, and it’ll be there for literally anyone running against him. I’m talking about taking that and multiplying it by some amount by actually getting people excited about what the candidate can do for them personally. I think that every single state that isn’t hard red is in play with the right candidate and it’s entirely possible to run the table in every contested Senate election for a landslide not seen since Reagan.

It’s not likely, but it’s the top 5% of possible outcomes. I think we lose that possibility with the eDem candidates… and we lose a lot of equity in the outcomes that are good but not quite that good.

Tell people the economy is bad repeatedly while not using numbers. If most of the country really hates Trump, then they will be willing to believe that the economy is bad just to spite him and have a reason to vote against him. Don’t get bogged down on the details of trying to prove the economy is bad.

It’s an interesting article, but it’s extrapolating a lot from a study that originated in Singapore - which is one of the more “interesting” social systems around. So I dunno, but as I said, interesting. How much it relates to the US is not at all clear to me.

MM MD

I’m not saying “don’t believe the numbers”. I’m saying don’t concede that the economy is doing well because the DJIA hit a new record. Give your own numbers. A larger percentage of Americans not having $1000 in savings is a far better assessment of the economy than how much money 30 large companies are making.

2 Likes

I think Bernie has the right approach: “We need an economy that works for everyone, not just the millionaires and billionaires.”
Acknowledge that the economy is growing but make the 99%(90%?) understand that they aren’t getting much/any of it.

3 Likes

How?

https://twitter.com/realtuckfrumper/status/1207339026996514816

1 Like

The senate map was ludicrously favorable for the GOP. That was the 2012 Senate class. Fading losing a whole bunch was kind of a minor miracle… and our side won a ton of state level shit in 2018… I’m not sure how you’re framing that as a loss either. Yes we got beat in the governors races in GA and FL… but that’s because they stole them lol. Look at how hard they had to cheat to win those. Very heartening.

Dude if you really want to see the glass half empty on the 2018 results I can’t stop you, in fact it’s probably for the best because it means you’re scared and will almost certainly go vote… but it wasn’t anywhere near as bad as you’re portraying it. It was a battle we won. We just didn’t win the war yet. 2020 is our first real shot at winning the war, but honestly we probably won’t finish it there either. This is going to be a long slog, particularly if the Dems continue to insist that this isn’t a war and norms must be respected.

Obviously the optimal line would be to say fuck norms because the other side doesn’t respect them and go all out every step of the way from now on… but the eDems see themselves as the good guys and we can’t fix their broken boomer brains so we have to wait for them to do this as slowly as fucking possible.

This isn’t true. We held a Senate majority as recently as 2014. Allowing the filibuster to continue to exist is why we didn’t get to keep it. The filibuster is the problem. Obviously we’re never getting to 60 votes in the Senate so allowing it to continue to exist as the Democrats is just idiotic.

In the next election the GOP has 22 Senate seats to defend and we have 12. Also they have Trump on the ballot. They only have 53 total seats. They can lose this easily if Trump gets rolled… which is super likely given how triggered our side is.

Which states do you consider flippable?

That depends an awful lot on how hard we win at the top of the ticket. It’s very fluid right now. I think it’s theoretically possible to win Texas, but I’m a lot more optimistic than you guys. The only safe R’s I see are in MS, MT, AK, AR, LA, NE, OK, SD, TN, WV, and WY. Everyone else could lose. Some of them are highly unlikely like Mitch, but it’s not that tall a hill to climb if Trump melts down spectacularly… which we’re drawing super live to.

boredsocial, I fear for your health next November my friend