Campaign 2020

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 16359
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Big Magilla » Tue Oct 15, 2019 3:47 am

From CNBC:

Mike Bloomberg might end up running for president, after all. Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York, has indicated to associates in recent weeks that Joe Biden’s recent struggles against Sen. Elizabeth Warren are making him rethink his decision to stay out of the 2020 Democratic primary.

That’s according to people familiar with the discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity because the conversations were deemed private.
Bloomberg has signaled he’s “still looking at” running for president, but people close him say that the only way he could even go down that path is if Biden’s fortunes suffer so much that he drops out before or during the early stages of the primary.

Sabin
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7824
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Sabin » Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:51 pm

Mister Tee wrote
I'm not sure if the Keys system is going to be fully predictive this year -- Trump is so sui generis horrible and both reviled/adored that a rigorous up/down system may not encompass all that voters are considering.

There would be a symmetry to Lichtman's formula beginning at the start of one civil war and ending at another.

Ask a Trump voter, and the only keys he has lost are Party Mandate, Foreign/Military Success (maybe?) which would put him in the best position for reelection since Reagan in 1984.

Ask a Democrat, and he's fucked with nine keys against him (Party Mandate, Short-Term, Long-Term, Policy Change, Social Unrest, Scandal, Foreign Failure, Foreign Success, and Incumbent Charisma) and if he's removed from office resulting in a serious contest for the nomination the party might have ten or eleven against them.

What is the truth?

Also, perhaps you can educate me: Lichtman is consistently cited as the man who predicted Trump's victory. Doesn't his model point to Clinton? The Democrats only lost five keys in 2016 (Party Mandate, Incumbency, Policy Change, Foreign Military Success, Incumbent Charisma). That would point towards Clinton winning the popular vote. That said, it was the kind of screwy election where Bernie Sanders' candidacy had the appearance of a serious contest but there was no second ballot, where the two third party candidates' totals combined totaled more than 5% of the vote but not individually, where the same Republicans who currently tout Trump's miraculous economy said we were doing terribly back in 2016, where Black Lives Matter activists were received very differently on both sides, where Benghazi continued to loom in Republican minds and Edward Snowden in Democrats', where the Iran deal (remember that?) was widely disregarded by 50% of the media, and how does one gauge the charisma of Donald Trump? Either way, by any metric, Trump came millions shy of the POPULAR vote which is the only predictor Lichtman talks about.

Mister Tee wrot[e/b]
And, in the past week, I'd say the actions re: Syria/the Kurds has pushed the foreign policy failure Key emphatically down. It took two years for Iraq to become as clear a negative for Bush as this situation has for Trump in just a matter of days.

I'm glad you posted this because it's something I've been wondering. It's just so horrible. Even Noam Chomsky thinks we should remain in that area of the Middle East.

[b]Mister Tee wrote
Add these to the Keys Lichtman clearly marks down -- Congressional mandate, lack of foreign policy success, incumbent charisma -- and he's on the brink, with significant policy change very debatable, and short-term economy/opponent charisma yet to be decided. (To say nothing of, should he actually be removed from office, intra-party split or -- don't discount it -- social unrest.)

So, we have four currently? If he is impeached, that will be five.

What is his significant policy change? The wall was not built. The tax cuts were draconian, crazy, unpopular, and just tax cuts. Just a general redirection of priority akin to the Reagan revolution?

If one party is going to split before the election, it doesn't seem like it's going to be the Democratic Party.
"Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough." ~ FDR

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6891
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Mister Tee » Mon Oct 14, 2019 2:02 pm

Here's an item that does fall under Campaign 2020:

I'm not sure if the Keys system is going to be fully predictive this year -- Trump is so sui generis horrible and both reviled/adored that a rigorous up/down system may not encompass all that voters are considering.

But if it does...i say the past few weeks have seriously damaged Trump's standing. I was already on record saying I thought Lichtman's "Dems must impeach for scandal to count" was weak sauce, but, in any case, he's now got what he wanted and polls are showing the scandal key is down about as far as it could be.

And, in the past week, I'd say the actions re: Syria/the Kurds has pushed the foreign policy failure Key emphatically down. It took two years for Iraq to become as clear a negative for Bush as this situation has for Trump in just a matter of days.

Add these to the Keys Lichtman clearly marks down -- Congressional mandate, lack of foreign policy success, incumbent charisma -- and he's on the brink, with significant policy change very debatable, and short-term economy/opponent charisma yet to be decided. (To say nothing of, should he actually be removed from office, intra-party split or -- don't discount it -- social unrest.)

Botom line: Trump's disapproval numbers have always marked him a difficult prospect for re-election, even not meeting Lichtman's criteria. Now his system is beginning to line up with those empirical numbers.

Sabin
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7824
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Sabin » Sat Oct 12, 2019 10:36 am

I support an impeachment thread. For sure. At this point, I have three bets going with my friends and so I’d like to see how I’m doing on them.
"Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough." ~ FDR

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 16359
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Big Magilla » Fri Oct 11, 2019 3:29 pm

There's not much going on otherwise. Let's see what next week brings.

The two things are still closely intertwined. The Trump-Giuliani smear campaign against Biden in Ukraine was started to knock Trump's most likely opponent out of the race. They have so much proof now the impeachment vote can't be too far off at which time it will definitely require its own thread. They say Thanksgiving, but it should be Halloween, a more fitting holiday tie-in with all these scary characters.

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6891
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Mister Tee » Fri Oct 11, 2019 2:35 pm

So, I'm wondering: is it time for a separate thread on The Impeachment of Donald Trump? Stories are tumbling out seemingly hourly, one more serious/crazy than the last, and it seems it might be worth segregating from the Campaign thread (as the Campaign thread was from the daily developments thread).

Note: of course, by Impeachment I mean impeachment by the House, which I view as a certainty, as opposed to removal, which is an unknown variable. (Though more likely than anyone would have dreamt a month ago.)

I also recognize things germane to Impeachment will in many cases overlap/cross over with this thread -- in the same way that an economic crash would hover between daily developments and a Campaign issue -- but that's something we can sort out item by item. I just think there's going to be a LOT of news on the Impeachment front in the coming weeks, and it deserves a place of its own.

Sabin
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7824
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Sabin » Fri Oct 11, 2019 3:08 am

During the 2016 presidential election, many truly remarkable things occurred. One of them was when Donald Trump broke George W. Bush's stranglehold on the Republican Party, permanently. Today, Bush seems more revered by Democrats who secretly long for a simpler time and a simpler enemy. By the close of 2008, you could tell that the Republican Party was ashamed of George W. Bush. They knew hew as a failure who spent too much, got us into two failed wars, and collapsed the economy. It's hard to find a reset button after that for a political party, but they found it in the collapse, protesting TARP, a scary black President, the ACA, and the birth of the Tea Party. Within months, they went from being the Party responsible for devastation to the Party dedicated to protecting your freedoms. To quote Bill Clinton, "It takes a lot of brass to blame the other guy for what you did." However, in one Republican debate, Donald Trump blamed George W. Bush for 9/11. Remarkable stuff. No Democrat would be caught dead saying as much. I remember hearing boos but I think it won him a lot of support from Republicans, old and new, desperate to turn the page.


Very interesting that the atrocities of both George W. Bush and Donald Trump dominated the news cycles this week.

Over the past three years, George W. Bush's rehabilitation has nauseated me. I understand why our country harkens back to an era of "civility" (when our President was an idiot and not a racist insult comic) but that is certainly not how it felt at the time. Seeing the Obamas cozy up to the Bushes didn't do it because one could rationalize that as former Presidents and First Ladies there were reasons for their proximity and the Obamas were simply demonstrating civility, although by all accounts they are indeed friends. It took Ellen DeGeneres, a rich white liberal woman, to show public displays of friendship for the world to remember that Bush is a war criminal. The spark may be the hypocrisy of Ellen acting friendly with a man who campaigned against gay marriage in 2004 (whether it was genuine or not), but really I think it's the anti-establishment mood of the country. Both the right and the left are dedicated to hunting out hypocrites wherever they may find them, as well as the notion that there are no disagreements among the mega-rich. I happen to agree with them in this instance but more so I'm just glad that people are remembering what a horrible war monger Bush was.

Trump has an interesting relationship with war. He's simultaneously the one president of my life most likely to start World War III and yet his base seems to have an isolationist slant to them. In 2016, he campaigned against Hillary Clinton as a hawk AND a dove capturing both at the same time. It's staggering to think that people rationalized a vote for Trump because Clinton was a hawk -- I would ask those people how they feel today with what we know about the Kurds. Put aside isolationism and interventionism, we now know that the Kurds are being slaughtered either because Turkey had dirt on Trump or our President is too much of a child to be on the phone for too long. I happen to think that Trump is staying in power but if the Senate vote was today, I think he'd be removed. Despite the fact that increasingly the Democratic Party has become the party of responsibility (perhaps too much) and the Republican Party has become the haunted graveyard where all of America's worst ghosts come back to life, this is a bridge too far for most Republicans. They still have to worry about reelection and their donors, and this week was disgusting. If we are attacked again, I know I will look to this past week for answers. No man keeps us less safe.
"Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough." ~ FDR

Sabin
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7824
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Sabin » Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:02 pm

Same incident.

Precious Doll wrote
Thanks for your insights Sabin, I found them most interesting.

You’re welcome.
"Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough." ~ FDR

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12715
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby OscarGuy » Fri Oct 04, 2019 10:36 pm

Sabin wrote:The New York Times reports that Bernie Sanders had a heart attack.


Is that a separate incident or the incident that led to the stents?
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4049
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Precious Doll » Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:26 pm

Thanks for your insights Sabin, I found them most interesting.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)

Sabin
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7824
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Sabin » Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:41 pm

The New York Times reports that Bernie Sanders had a heart attack.
"Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough." ~ FDR

Sabin
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7824
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Sabin » Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:41 pm

Precious Doll wrote
I think politics has become so toxic worldwide that any candidate put forward tends to have negatives thrown against them. There is the saying that 'you can't please all of the people all of the time' which is so very true but politicans of all persuasions have rightly or wrongly so much shit thrown at them these days. I do think we have gotten to a point where no country is on the planet is 'governable' and we are in the process of entering a downward spiral of the likes none of us have ever likely actually experienced firsthand ourselves.

I just hate thinking that engagement is a bad thing. Sure, there problems with said engagement (chief among them: nuance is a rarity) but ... maybe it's for the best?


Precious Doll wrote
That is true but the problem younger candidates face is 'they don't have enough experience' and so on. (Personally from what I have observed the candidate that most impresses me is Kamala Harris but I doubt she will happen and at the end of the day it is the voters in the US who have the final say and whoever their choice is should be respected).

I don't think the problem with the younger candidate is that they don't have enough experience at all. I think there are much bigger problems but it is strange that none of the younger candidates are currently catching on. And the problem is less that they don't have experience but some of what they have is bad.

Since Election Day, 2016, before she even took office, Kamala Harris was the smart money for the next Democratic nominee. Sure, she is inexperienced but the Democratic Party has always done fairly well with younger candidates who demonstrate more a capacity to inspire change rather than showing their receipts. She is a very promising, strong politician. Her track record as California AG is a mixed bag. Without delving into specifics, she adopted some tough on crime stances that are very unpopular today. What's worse is that she proved herself entirely incapable of defending her choices when pressed by Tulsi Gabbard two debates ago. Since then, she's tried to regain her previous momentum but hasn't risen above single digits since. I have friend who is adamant that she will come back but I think her only chance is if one or more of the septuagenarian front-runners drops out. When I look at her, I still think I see a future President.

Pete Buttigieg was a completely unknown Mayor of South Bend, Indiana, who got a huge boost in popularity earlier this year by appearing on every single major news outlet available. To put it mildly, his very candidacy is a story: the first major millennial candidate, the first openly gay candidate, a veteran, a polyglot, a devout Christian, and in that moment seemingly the only calm, pleasing toned candidate. He spoke of ending divisions, coming together, and big picture stuff exactly how Obama did back in 2008. But the more he talked, the more it became clear his rhetoric was largely free of substance. He refused to answer any questions about specific policy. Which became the story. For me, it's not a deal-breaker but it just became so obvious that was his strategy. And the more that people looked into his tenure as Mayor, the more they found instances of racist policies and practices. Once the luster of his initial candidacy wore off, I think voters started to wonder "What of substance are we celebrating?" And now it looks like he hates being on the stage.

Beto O'Rourke, on the other hand, is a remarkable disappointment. He's a former Texas Rep who challenged Ted Cruz last year and came very close to winning. A tall, white, liberal Texan with a Spanish nickname and an Irish last name, who went viral speaking perfectly about race injustice in. America. Comparisons to another Robert Francis were bandied about. Liberal America fell in love with Beto during his Senate race. His Presidential race has been almost a disaster. His Vanity Fair article looked self-absorbed. His public speeches and appearances were laden with nervous tics, halting speeches, and awkward moments. There were no policy proposals. And he has no record of merit worth getting excited about. His campaign has turned a slight corner following the El Paso shootings. He's seemingly latched onto gun control as his big issue (going so far as to advocate for gun confiscation, saying "Hell, yeah, we're gonna take your [guns]") and his odds within the party have been ticking up slightly. Personally, I don't just think his campaign is over, I think unless someone is foolish enough to pick him as VP, his political career in Texas is over. How is he ever going to be elected anywhere in Texas with the phrase "Hell, yeah, we're gonna take your [guns]" following him?

There are other young people in the race. Cory Booker (too many bank ties), Julian Castro (seems too preppy and goes too negative), Tulsi Gabbard (possibly a spy). But as of this moment, it sure does seem like they are all running for Vice President. They seem to be the entirety of the running mate pool. That said, it's a strong, talented field and whoever is chosen as running mate to Biden, Sanders, or Warren will likely be viewed and vetted as more a possible Future President than any we've seen in some time.

User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4049
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Precious Doll » Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:53 am

Heksagon wrote:The Democratic Party has plenty of qualified younger candidates, it feels insane to me that there's people as old as Biden, Sanders or even Warren polling so highly.

A political leader in their 80s is a huge unnecessary risk, as their health can deteriorate rapidly and they recover much worse from health problems that younger men can recover from easily. Reagan's memory problems were most likely accelerated by the attempted assassination on him, although he appeared to superficially recover from that.


That is true but the problem younger candidates face is 'they don't have enough experience' and so on. (Personally from what I have observed the candidate that most impresses me is Kamala Harris but I doubt she will happen and at the end of the day it is the voters in the US who have the final say and whoever their choice is should be respected).

I think politics has become so toxic worldwide that any candidate put forward tends to have negatives thrown against them. There is the saying that 'you can't please all of the people all of the time' which is so very true but politicans of all persuasions have rightly or wrongly so much shit thrown at them these days. I do think we have gotten to a point where no country is on the planet is 'governable' and we are in the process of entering a downward spiral of the likes none of us have ever likely actually experienced firsthand ourselves.

One only has to look at the environmental crisis facing the planet and that little progress that is being made on a Global level to what is the greatest threat ever to all life on the planet, though as I am from the school of thought that we have already entered the era of the 'sixth great extinction' - this one man made - I'm beyond the point of not caring but I don't have children, etc so its an easy out for me. I can't even begin to imagine the fear faced by parents for their children and for younger people for their futures on this degrading planet we all share.

Having said all that I'm a pessimist at heart and for most of my life have viewed the future with doom and gloom, however nearly 30 years ago with the fall of the Berlin Wall I did really think things might get better worldwide but they didn't. Still there is a saying 'Live as if you were going to die tomorrow but work as if you were going to live forever'. Made sense decades ago when I heard it but nowadays most people seem to only work for the benefit on the 1% filthy rich.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)

Heksagon
Adjunct
Posts: 1162
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:39 pm
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Heksagon » Fri Oct 04, 2019 1:22 am

The Democratic Party has plenty of qualified younger candidates, it feels insane to me that there's people as old as Biden, Sanders or even Warren polling so highly.

A political leader in their 80s is a huge unnecessary risk, as their health can deteriorate rapidly and they recover much worse from health problems that younger men can recover from easily. Reagan's memory problems were most likely accelerated by the attempted assassination on him, although he appeared to superficially recover from that.

User avatar
Precious Doll
Emeritus
Posts: 4049
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Campaign 2020

Postby Precious Doll » Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:51 pm

Any kind of medical procedure that a candidate, or sitting leader, etc has is always going to be speculated on by the press and public and used against them to some degree by some people. Unless someone has something terminal it really should have little impact on their ability to undertake their role once they have recovered, which will vary to a number of factors. Unless a person announced their retirement (for whatever reason) they are still very much in the game.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)


Return to “Current Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Mister Tee and 0 guests