Topic: 2020 Democrats - page 55. (Read 12658 times)

Didn't know that.
I thought her appearance at the Grammys last weekend was some kind of political move, like a popularity check.
Is she endorsing anyone?

You mean just like the Dems now? Keep dreaming. Trump is going to stomp a new mud hole in all of these candidates. Soon you will figure out why

You look like a too straight forward man, if we go more straight forward, none of the candidates listed on the pole have much chances of defeating the Giant Trump and his power. So, what I suggested were just my side of prediction to the 2020 election as trump was not on the listed pole! everyone could have a different perspective but no one can give the final result as it's what called as politics right? Also did you judged the victory of Trump correctly in the last election somewhere?

Of all of them I think only Biden has a chance. He will get the establishment Dems. But he is not going to get the Sanders wing. Many of them will vote Green or not come out at all.  The Sanders wing is not going to be enthusiastic for him.

Bloomberg is dead in the water. Not only will the Sanders wing reject him out of hand but so will the labor Dems. Not only that but many of them are very pro-Second Amendment and Bloomberg, with his gun-confiscation rhetoric and actions, is anathema.

Sanders will be opposed by the corporate Dems. Many suburban Dems will refuse to vote for him. Would they hold their nose and vote for Trump is the economy is good? Not vote? Go third party? I don't know. But many - too many for the Dems electoral chances - will refuse to vote for Sanders.

I am not an American, But I often take interest in the politics around the world. I had to keep up with the 2020 elections and who could win and who could loose. Also, there is for sure a global interest in the election of the world's biggest superpower.

But as most of us can see Trump has already made his hands strong by adding some self made ways to keep him in power for longer time. But many people in America are subjected to change and are turning towards some new and  potential candidates to defeat Trump.

My 3 votes goes to John Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Michael Bloomberg. I think most of the people tend to put someone powerful candidate in oppose of trump and his unwanted wins.

John Biden : He is one of the strongest opponent as he has some good advantage's and a positive approach. Also as theymos said he has already worked with Obama ( the most loved president), which makes him a more favorable candidate overall. He has already been president from 2009- 2017 which increase his operating experiences in politics.

Michael Bloomberg: He is the one with large net-worth and has a high financial status as trump has, which could make him get most of the power and votes in hand. He is the 8th richest in united states and 11th richest in the world. Looks like a very potential candidate for sure.

Bernie Sanders: He could be quoted as 2016 runners up and also a candidate to be looked upon by the voters due to his dyspeptic leftism. Being an older candidate in the American politics makes him a worthy full one.

Obama was also from Hawaii so I don't understand the lower 48 thing.  Tulsi has a surprising amount of support from Libertarians.  As a veteran, she would attract a lot of the "patriot" vote.  A lot of the Ron Paul types would crossover to support her.   The media blackout will definitely hold her back in the primary but having  a veteran call out the military industrial complex on a debate stage could be an Overton window-shifting event.  

Sanders has helped move the Democratic party to the left as many of the major contenders are emulating his socialist economic views (such as proposing medicare for all).

Obama was accused of being a socialist early in his first term, which he denied and many of his defenders refuted. Today, many in the Democratic party proudly wear that title, and back socialist proposals. 

Are you enjoying watching the Democratic talking heads exploding? I think that the Democratic Party may come to an end if the Sanders wing wins. Neither the corporate Dems nor the Labor Dems can stand their identitarian, intersectional view of the world. The corporate Dems know that their money will dry up and the labor Dems know that they will be sacrificed at a heart beat for the next cause de jour.

I want Bernie or Warren to win, mostly because it will be so awesome to watch Republican talking heads exploding for 4 straight years!

I wonder if Biden is going to run, does he want to go out out on top or risk losing to primary voters who may have shifted to his left too far?  I wonder if Biden is more worried about the primary than the general?

....ghost written, you mean.

Go back to her college thesis if you want to see her writing, or don't bother, just take my word for it it is quite tedious and boring.

Michelle Obama would have no chance and I don't think she has the desire to.

The Democratic Party has pretty much abandoned it's labor roots. It's now split between the corporate Democrat wing.  Libertarian on social issues; high tax rate for income earners but geared for the corporate donors to do well. Really wealthy people do not get a large percentage of their income from wages so the nominal rate doesn't affect them. The US is going through a Cultural Revolution analogous to what China went through in the 1960s. The two wings of the party are incompatible.  Right now almost all the players are on the Cultural Revolution side. The corporate Dems are still figuring out who to support - but you can be sure that they wont coalesce around the Sanders wing.

US politics has changed in many ways. One of the key example is Trump's capturing a large portion of what used to be the Democrat's Labor Wing.

Where does Michelle Obama fit in to this? Her husband rallied the nascent Cultural Revolution side but did acted as a corporate Dem. She will be held suspect by the Cultural Revolution side (which is where I believe her heart is). Therefore she will be forced to woo them and alienate the corporate Dems and the remain labor Dems.

Add to it that she has zero experience and she won't have a chance. Trump ran billion dollar organizations. He has been known (and if you look at Oprah interviews from the 1980s and 1990s) he was greatly admired for years.  He was never considered a racist or fascist until he entered the race. In fact, in many ways, Trump is a 1970-80s style Democrat. Free trade but don't sell out labor. Pro-environment but not at the cost of impoverishing people. Pro-immigration provided that it's within the proscribed laws. (There's over a million legal immigrants to the US per year.) 

I held my nose and "voted" for Harris, Booker, and O'rourke.   I think if the Demoncrats' primaries were held today those would be the most likely winners, in that order.  I wouldn't actually vote for a Democrat in this day and age, most are far too left for my tastes.

If one of the more centrist candidates actually wins the primary I wouldn't be surprised if that candidate wins the general election also.  I don't think that a centrist candidate has a snow-ball's chances to win the primary, however.  This primary season has been leaning way too far to the left with the AOC factor pushing otherwise centrist candidates hard to the extreme.  It's not unusual for a candidate to pander to the extreme during the primaries, and then center up for the general election.  But with the extreme being so far to the extreme in this situation it'll be hard for any Democrat to recover the centrist vote.


Not a stupid question at all, I wouldn't be surprised to find her on the ticket in 2024.  I think she's smart enough to know that beating Trump in 2020 is an uphill battle, she'll just sit back and watch the clusterfuck unfold.  

I don't think politics was Michelle Obama's choice and I also don't think that as a mom, she would choose to put her children back there again.
She wrote a well received book that I may get on Audible :-).



I'm an independent and will not be voting for Trump but I haven't seen any candidates that I want to vote for.

Yang has an unusual platform with UBI and his tech knowledge, though I would prefer a seasoned politician this time (eeek just saying the word lol)
however we have entered into a technological revolution and after years of watching politicians trying to wrap their head around bitcoin, I'm convinced that they are completely at a loss for getting us *smoothly through the new age.

Like it or not the candidate will have to be able to carry themselves with some grace while getting taunted grade school children style from Trump.
I usually watch debates, cspan, hearings and such far more than news. I don't know if I'll continue that.

I won't be voting for Sanders and I hope the Dems don't put him as the contender again.

I went with Joe Biden.  I think his name recognition and association with Obama makes him the most likely candidate to become President.  I also think he would be resistant to some of the more extreme ideas on the left.

This thread focuses on the Democrats. Imagine that a Democrat is certain to win, and pick your favorite(s). I worded the poll that way because I didn't want people to pick the person who they thought Trump would most easily defeat.


Agreed, her record is terrible from any leftist perspective, and is totally at odds with her current rhetoric. But she's clearly being railroaded into winning by the media and the establishment in the same way as Clinton in 2016. I suppose they have her as their "far-left" option and Biden as their centrist option, and one of them will drop out & clear the way for the other near the end.

Trump is not in your poll (To win the presidency). 

I expect Sanders to make it past the early primaries because of his grassroots fundraising ability and as such will likely be one of the last to be eleminated from contention. Out of those who have a realistic chance of winning the nomination, he has the least damaging platform as the party has moved far to the left.

Biden is very well known and may win the primary but if he does, he may have exposure from his potential involvement in the spying on the trump campaign (this mat have to do with why trump hasn’t declassified relevant information that many are calling for).

Harris was too hard on crime during her time as CA AG which will make her struggle with those who might have voted for her because of identity politics.

Booker has written he has sexually assaulted a woman in the past and should have no chance of winning the presidency because of this.

Pocahontas has too much baggage from pretending to be an Indian for her own personal financial gain and it will be easy to highlight the unfairness of forced “diversity” in addition to the fact she is a fraud.

Klobuchar Is too moderate to have a realistic chance. She has the least damaging platform of those I am familiar with. The WSJ editorial board endorsed her candidacy.

Beto Francis seems to have come out of nowhere and likely raised as much as he did because Democrats were trying to win the Senate and that seat was the easiest path to do so.

Gillibrand has changed her views so dramatically it is difficult to tell what kind of administration she would run. She appears to take whatever position she thinks is most popular and has the best chance of getting elected. I don’t think she is a serious candidate.

Everyone else I either don’t know enough about, haven’t heard of and/or doesn’t have a realistic chance of making it past the early primaries.

I suspect someone with extreme views/platform will win the nomination and lose to trump. Trumps criminal reform will likely get some moderates on the left to vote for him and more will vote for him once the effects of his tax cuts are more well known and understood by the masses.

She's very unlikely to win the primary because:
 - Democrats like to believe the Russia conspiracy theories against Trump, which has put them into an especially anti-Russia, pro-war mindset. The Democratic party is more pro-war than the Republican party nowadays, and all but ~3 of the notable candidates I listed are pro-war.
 - There are candidates further to the left of Gabbard economically, and her far-left economic "lane" is already packed.
 - The mainstream media is controlled by pro-war interests, so they mostly ignore Gabbard, and they attack her when they're not ignoring her. Especially in such a packed field, you need tons of media exposure to have a chance. Democratic voters are especially likely to trust the mainstream media; while Trump was able to convince Republicans that the media can't be trusted, this'd be a lot more difficult with Democrats.
 - Even moreso than the Republican party, the Democratic party is heavily influenced by an elite establishment group, and this group is pro-war. The nominee is chosen in part by a group of "superdelegates" who are not chosen by popular vote, the debates will be structured to disadvantage Gabbard, etc.

But if she somehow won the primary, and it was a race between her and Trump, I think that she'd have an excellent chance of winning because her anti-war and economic messages are generally popular, and people will like her style more than Trump's.

Some people won't vote for a woman, but some will vote for a candidate just because she's a woman; it's a wash IMO. I also don't think that her age or race are significant net factors. Her Hindu religion would definitely harm her in the general election, but against Trump (who everyone knows only pays lip service to religion) it's maybe not a huge deal.


She'd be a strong candidate, but she's ruled it out.

Not from the US either so this might be a stupid question but: no Michelle Obama ?

As a non citizen I watch US elections EXACTLY as I watch olympics though it tends to make me sad in the end 

Would you mind explaining yourself on Tulsi Gabbard? How can you consider so low on winning primary and so high on ending president?
And I don't see how a not evel 40 years old not truly American (as in not born on US mainland ground) female can win the presidency but that would be fun ^^

It's quite early, but it looks like the 2020 Democratic lineup has become pretty solidified now. Biden is expected to announce any day now, and then all of the expected big names will be in except maybe Bloomberg.

I follow politics like many people follow sports, and this is going to be a fun one to watch, similar to the 2016 Republican primary. (Though nobody can beat Trump's entertainment factor.) My current opinions (note that I don't actually support or like any of them):

Candidate	Ranked likelihood to win the primary	Ranked likelihood to win the presidency assuming they win the primary	My preference
Joe Biden	1	4	9
Michael Bloomberg	3	6	10
Cory Booker	7	10	7
Pete Buttigieg	14	14	11
Julian Castro	6	2	3
John Delaney	11	12	4
Tulsi Gabbard	12	1	1
Kirsten Gillibrand	9	11	8
Kamala Harris	2	8	12
Amy Klobuchar	8	7	13
Beto O'Rourke	4	9	6
Bernie Sanders	5	3	2
Elizabeth Warren	10	13	14
Andrew Yang	13	5	5

Additional thoughts:
 - Biden: He has amazing name recognition and a strong association with Obama, who people love. But people remember him with rose-tinted glasses. He's kind of outside of the Democratic mainstream at this point; he reminds me more of Bush than eg. Sanders.
 - Bloomberg: His money could push him way up.
 - Gabbard: The strongest anti-war candidate. Due to this, the media and establishment hate her, and she's probably doomed in the primary.
 - Harris: Hillary Clinton 2.0, almost pre-selected to win by the media and establishment.
 - O'Rourke: Also a media darling, though that's worn off somewhat.
 - Sanders: The establishment still hates him and will try to crush him, and the far-left vote will be substantially split this time around. But he also has more name recognition now.

Who do you want to win, and who do you think will win?