The all too early DNC 2020 thread

#153
#153
DancingOutlaw said:
Plus if she loses that gives plenty of fodder to call 50% of the population both racist and sexist.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
golfballs said:
A more liberal yet less polarizing version of Hillary. I think she'd fare about the same.
Click to expand...
She'd have a much better chance at beating Donald than Hillary would. She has every liberal bonafide they could possibly want, is relatively young, a minority, and attractive. Had an Obama-esque upbringing. She also hasn't really been a politician for all that long (only been in Senate since 2017, was an AG/DA before that) so that could help with "outsider" credentials. Also from California, which helps immensely with fundraising.
 
#154
#154
05_never_again said:
Exactly.

She'd have a much better chance at beating Donald than Hillary would. She has every liberal bonafide they could possibly want, is relatively young, a minority, and attractive. Had an Obama-esque upbringing. She also hasn't really been a politician for all that long (only been in Senate since 2017, was an AG/DA before that) so that could help with "outsider" credentials. Also from California, which helps immensely with fundraising.
Click to expand...
I don't see any of her qualities helping in the midwest where Trump won the Presidency.
 
#155
#155
golfballs said:
I don't see any of her qualities helping in the midwest where Trump won the Presidency.
Click to expand...
She wouldn't necessarily have to. Donald's incredible results there in 2016 were a one-time wave, IMO, that he isn't going to be able to replicate. Now, that doesn't mean he can't win in 2020, but I don't think he can exactly replicate what he did in 2016, and the good news for him is that he doesn't have to. He didn't have to win Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. He only needs one of them, provided the rest of the map stays the same, and even that is a big assumption. Republicans have a tougher hill to climb in the Electoral College than Democrats do.

We're already seeing via the midterms that the surge Donald had there in 2016 could be fading a bit, and I would expect that to continue over the next 2 years. And of course, if there is a recession between now and election day 2020, the Dems could run a potted plant and they'd win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#156
#156
05_never_again said:
She wouldn't necessarily have to. Donald's incredible results there in 2016 were a one-time wave, IMO, that he isn't going to be able to replicate. Now, that doesn't mean he can't win in 2020, but I don't think he can exactly replicate what he did in 2016, and the good news for him is that he doesn't have to. He didn't have to win Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. He only needs one of them, provided the rest of the map stays the same, and even that is a big assumption. Republicans have a tougher hill to climb in the Electoral College than Democrats do.

We're already seeing via the midterms that the surge Donald had there in 2016 could be fading a bit, and I would expect that to continue over the next 2 years. And of course, if there is a recession between now and election day 2020, the Dems could run a potted plant and they'd win.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a rehash of all the 2016 predictions. They were all wrong. I think Biden has as good of a shot at winning than Kampala does. If Ohio and Florida are any indication, no things aren’t trending in Dems favors

Also the next recession probably won’t happen until after 2020
 
#157
#157
The majority party always loses seats in the midterm following a presidential election. In this case republicans actually added to their senate majority. So no, I don’t see anything in midterm results that indicate Dems are winning 2020. If anything I think the results point to the opposite outcome. Dems didn’t get a resounding victory and still don’t have any clear candidate
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matt2496
#158
#158
golfballs said:
This sounds like a rehash of all the 2016 predictions. They were all wrong. I think Biden has as good of a shot at winning than Kampala does. If Ohio and Florida are any indication, no things aren’t trending in Dems favors

Also the next recession probably won’t happen until after 2020
Click to expand...
No, the 2016 predictions said Donald had virtually zero chance of winning. I never believed that, and I certainly don't believe he has a zero or near zero chance of winning in 2020. He'll be the incumbent in 2020, which, all else equal, means he'll have a better chance of winning in 2020 than he did in 2016. There is a lot that can happen in 2 years though.

What I could see happening in 2020 is that the Midwest Republican wave isn't as strong, but he has an easier time in places like Florida (swing state) or North Carolina (traditional Republican). Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania aren't traditionally Republican states or even swing states; they are blue states. Why 2016 was so surprising isn't necessarily that Donald won; it was exactly how far he went through the Blue Wall. As I said earlier, he didn't even need Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania to win. He needed just 1 of the 3. So the Midwest wave can be weaker in 2020 and he could still win.
 
#159
#159
05_never_again said:
No, the 2016 predictions said Donald had virtually zero chance of winning. I never believed that, and I certainly don't believe he has a zero or near zero chance of winning in 2020. He'll be the incumbent in 2020, which, all else equal, means he'll have a better chance of winning in 2020 than he did in 2016. There is a lot that can happen in 2 years though.

What I could see happening in 2020 is that the Midwest Republican wave isn't as strong, but he has an easier time in places like Florida (swing state) or North Carolina (traditional Republican). Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania aren't traditionally Republican states or even swing states; they are blue states. Why 2016 was so surprising isn't necessarily that Donald won; it was exactly how far he went through the Blue Wall. As I said earlier, he didn't even need Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania to win. He needed just 1 of the 3. So the Midwest wave can be weaker in 2020 and he could still win.
Click to expand...
I agree
 
#163
#163
05_never_again said:
Exactly.

She'd have a much better chance at beating Donald than Hillary would. She has every liberal bonafide they could possibly want, is relatively young, a minority, and attractive. Had an Obama-esque upbringing. She also hasn't really been a politician for all that long (only been in Senate since 2017, was an AG/DA before that) so that could help with "outsider" credentials. Also from California, which helps immensely with fundraising.
Click to expand...
What?
She is attractive for a JV softball coach..
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top