2020 Democrat Presidential Candidate News...

KillerGopherFan

Active member
He shot himself in the foot with ridiculous positions on guns etc. That said, he really should run for Senate.
Yeah, make him a three time loser.

Democrats are screwed. They’re only slightly closer now to sorting out this horrible field of candidates than they were 4 months ago.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Your leading candidate is near or at his lowest total support since he entered the race, he has only $9 million in campaign contributions banked, millennials have no interest in him, he’s a human gaffe machine, and there are significant unanswered questions about the potential corruption involving him and his son’s profiteering from dad’s VP position. The only reason he has any support is b/c of his position as Obama’s VP and Democrats think he has the best chance to beat Trump, even though Obama won’t yet endorse him.

Your second leading candidate is advocating for around $60 trillion in new Federal spending over the next decade for healthcare, climate change, free college, student loan forgiveness, etc., while simultaneously destroying business and the economy with bigger government, excessively high taxes, and over-regulation. There’s no conceivable way for her to pay for her initiatives without hefty tax increases on everyone who currently pays Federal taxes and probably some who don’t, and she acts as if high business taxes won’t be passed on to the consuming public. And even Biden is making great future Trump ads against Warren should she be nominated, by mocking the ridiculous costs of her healthcare proposal. The only good thing about the aforementioned is that it has diverted attention from her tendency to make sh!t up about her family heritage and personal experiences.

Your third leading candidate is a cranky, old, Socialist who wants to spend a little less than Warren on healthcare to construct a system that will provide Cuban-style free healthcare. He and Warren want to make private healthcare insurance illegal to assure that we all get the same level of crap healthcare. Bernie wants to go all in on ‘Climate Change’, and like Warren, ban fracking and continue to diminish our production of our greatest economic natural resources. All you really need to know is that he has the backing of the Squad and wants to implement their agenda. God help us and the USA if he were to win.

And every other Democrat candidate with a realistic chance of nomination has some significant baggage. An articulate, intelligent, gay mayor of a big town in Indiana that minority voters won’t accept and is considered a moderate unless you compare his views to the Midwestern voters that Democrats MUST win over if they are to win the presidency. He’s big on eliminating the Electoral College b/c he wants left leaning metropolitan areas to pick US Presidents. Then there’s Kamala. If someone says debates don’t matter, look at Kamala. She had a good early debate and rose in the polls, then crashed in the others and in the polls.

And they’re still talking about who else might enter the race, while Hillary is waiting in the wings. Hahaha

You Dems are screwed. Happy Saturday!
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Minority voters will vote for Warren or Biden, but won’t vote for Buttigieg?

That, and then silly EC that will never happen and can be easily and quietly dropped, are the best you’ve got??

Will be interesting if he can keep gaining momentum in Iowa.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Yeah, make him a three time loser.

Democrats are screwed. They’re only slightly closer now to sorting out this horrible field of candidates than they were 4 months ago.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

Your leading candidate is near or at his lowest total support since he entered the race, he has only $9 million in campaign contributions banked, millennials have no interest in him, he’s a human gaffe machine, and there are significant unanswered questions about the potential corruption involving him and his son’s profiteering from dad’s VP position. The only reason he has any support is b/c of his position as Obama’s VP and Democrats think he has the best chance to beat Trump, even though Obama won’t yet endorse him.

Your second leading candidate is advocating for around $60 trillion in new Federal spending over the next decade for healthcare, climate change, free college, student loan forgiveness, etc., while simultaneously destroying business and the economy with bigger government, excessively high taxes, and over-regulation. There’s no conceivable way for her to pay for her initiatives without hefty tax increases on everyone who currently pays Federal taxes and probably some who don’t, and she acts as if high business taxes won’t be passed on to the consuming public. And even Biden is making great future Trump ads against Warren should she be nominated, by mocking the ridiculous costs of her healthcare proposal. The only good thing about the aforementioned is that it has diverted attention from her tendency to make sh!t up about her family heritage and personal experiences.

Your third leading candidate is a cranky, old, Socialist who wants to spend a little less than Warren on healthcare to construct a system that will provide Cuban-style free healthcare. He and Warren want to make private healthcare insurance illegal to assure that we all get the same level of crap healthcare. Bernie wants to go all in on ‘Climate Change’, and like Warren, ban fracking and continue to diminish our production of our greatest economic natural resources. All you really need to know is that he has the backing of the Squad and wants to implement their agenda. God help us and the USA if he were to win.

And every other Democrat candidate with a realistic chance of nomination has some significant baggage. An articulate, intelligent, gay mayor of a big town in Indiana that minority voters won’t accept and is considered a moderate unless you compare his views to the Midwestern voters that Democrats MUST win over if they are to win the presidency. He’s big on eliminating the Electoral College b/c he wants left leaning metropolitan areas to pick US Presidents. Then there’s Kamala. If someone says debates don’t matter, look at Kamala. She had a good early debate and rose in the polls, then crashed in the others and in the polls.

And they’re still talking about who else might enter the race, while Hillary is waiting in the wings. Hahaha

You Dems are screwed. Happy Saturday!
It's all smooth sailing for -20 Don! It's like you've never paid attention to a Presidential primary before.

Do you know who was leading the R race at this time in 2016? Sleepy Ben Carson. 2012? Newt. In 2008? Fraud Guarantee Rudy G. The Dems in 2008? Hillary. The Dems in 2004? Howard Dean and Dick Geophardt

And Hillary was the "least popular nominee" ever and beat him by 3 million votes. But yeah, Don's got 2020 in the bag. The American people love him and his policies!
 
Last edited:

KillerGopherFan

Active member
It's all smooth sailing for -20 Don! It's like you've never paid attention to a Presidential primary before.

Do you know who was leading the R race at this time in 2016? Sleepy Ben Carson. 2012? Newt. In 2008? Fraud Guarantee Rudy G. The Dems in 2008? Hillary. The Dems in 2004? Howard Dean and Dick Geophardt

And Hillary was the "least popular nominee" ever and beat him by 3 million votes. But yeah, Don's got 2020 in the bag. The American people love him and his policies!
2016 - Trump led most of the way after summer. Carson had one run at him, but never overtook him.
2012 - Romney was always in the top two and led Newt for most of the campaign, who only made one run at him and then faded.
2008 - McCain started as the solid #2 and was almost always in the top 3, then made his big run to #1 when Giuliani petered out, starting in November.

I gave you the dope on your current top 5 candidates. Could someone else emerge? Possible...b/c the current top 5 suck. But if they haven’t yet emerged from a field of 25 and after multiple debates, what’s the likelihood of one of those other 20something rising now? The only thing that can take one of the top 3 down at this point is a scandal or unforeseen incident or a coalescing of voters around another candidate as other candidates drop out. Unfortunately, none of the other candidates likely to drop out have enough support to make much of a difference.

The lesson from previous primary candidacies that you are ignoring is that of the top 3 candidates, one or two will fade, leaving one or two of those top 3 to duke it out. In 2012, there was obviously an anti-Romney segment that went from Perry to Cain to Newt to Santorum, but all failed.

It looks like you’re stuck with Biden vs Warren or Biden vs Bernie, unless Hillary (hahaha) comes to the rescue. I’m guessing Biden battles Warren in a bloody mess of a fight, but Biden needs a lot more voter excitement and money to hang.

A lot of people don’t like Trump’s behavior, but they do like prosperity and avoiding military conflicts. The Democrats have taken the entire party too far left for the country, and even put the House at risk with this impeachment process.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Breaking news. Full MAGA Qanon Trump supporter doesn't like any Dem candidates and says they all suck. Oh no. However can they win?
 

howeda7

Well-known member
2016 - Trump led most of the way after summer. Carson had one run at him, but never overtook him.
2012 - Romney was always in the top two and led Newt for most of the campaign, who only made one run at him and then faded.
2008 - McCain started as the solid #2 and was almost always in the top 3, then made his big run to #1 when Giuliani petered out, starting in November.

I gave you the dope on your current top 5 candidates. Could someone else emerge? Possible...b/c the current top 5 suck. But if they haven’t yet emerged from a field of 25 and after multiple debates, what’s the likelihood of one of those other 20something rising now? The only thing that can take one of the top 3 down at this point is a scandal or unforeseen incident or a coalescing of voters around another candidate as other candidates drop out. Unfortunately, none of the other candidates likely to drop out have enough support to make much of a difference.

The lesson from previous primary candidacies that you are ignoring is that of the top 3 candidates, one or two will fade, leaving one or two of those top 3 to duke it out. In 2012, there was obviously an anti-Romney segment that went from Perry to Cain to Newt to Santorum, but all failed.

It looks like you’re stuck with Biden vs Warren or Biden vs Bernie, unless Hillary (hahaha) comes to the rescue. I’m guessing Biden battles Warren in a bloody mess of a fight, but Biden needs a lot more voter excitement and money to hang.

A lot of people don’t like Trump’s behavior, but they do like prosperity and avoiding military conflicts. The Democrats have taken the entire party too far left for the country, and even put the House at risk with this impeachment process.
McCain was close to dropping out at one point. That Trump led the R primary nearly wire to wire must fill you with great pride.

There's never been a field this large before. Anyone claiming to know what will happen is a fool. I think one of Pete/Harris/Amy still has a decent shot if Biden continues to fade.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Breaking news. Full MAGA Qanon Trump supporter doesn't like any Dem candidates and says they all suck. Oh no. However can they win?
Also telling in his analysis, he’s hoping like heck that no one outside of Biden, Warren, or Sanders can win.

Let’s see if Buttigieg can continue picking up steam in Iowa. Granted, I’d vote for any of them over Trump.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
McCain was close to dropping out at one point. That Trump led the R primary nearly wire to wire must fill you with great pride.

There's never been a field this large before. Anyone claiming to know what will happen is a fool. I think one of Pete/Harris/Amy still has a decent shot if Biden continues to fade.
I’m willing to bet you that Pete/Harris/Amy won’t be the nominee. In fact, I’ll take Biden, Warren, and Bernie against the field of currently announced candidates.

“Do ya feel lucky punk”?
 

howeda7

Well-known member
I’m willing to bet you that Pete/Harris/Amy won’t be the nominee. In fact, I’ll take Biden, Warren, and Bernie against the field of currently announced candidates.

“Do ya feel lucky punk”?
You'll take the top 3? Wow. So bold of you. I'll take that bet if we double or nothing on the college football national championship. I get Alabama, Clemson and OSU. You can have the field.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
You'll take the top 3? Wow. So bold of you. I'll take that bet if we double or nothing on the college football national championship. I get Alabama, Clemson and OSU. You can have the field.
I’m not the one saying that others have a decent chance. I get 3 candidates and you get 20 opportunities.

Do you still think they have a “decent chance” or not? Don’t say things you don’t mean or are hoping for.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
I’m not the one saying that others have a decent chance. I get 3 candidates and you get 20 opportunities.

Do you still think they have a “decent chance” or not? Don’t say things you don’t mean or are hoping for.
Yes. But but by "decent chance" I don't mean > 50%.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/03/buttigieg-fourth-warren-second-nationally-poll

"
Buttigieg has surged to second in Iowa, the first state to vote. According to the realclearpolitics.com polling average, Warren leads there with 22.3%. Buttigieg is on 17%, Biden on 15.7% and Sanders on 15.3%.
"

3mo to go until Iowa. The trend has been: someone surges, then everyone turns all attention on them and attacks. Let's see whatcha got on Pete. So far from what I've seen on here, it is little and nothing.
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
McCain was close to dropping out at one point. That Trump led the R primary nearly wire to wire must fill you with great pride.

There's never been a field this large before. Anyone claiming to know what will happen is a fool. I think one of Pete/Harris/Amy still has a decent shot if Biden continues to fade.
This was the subject of a segment on This Week w/ Geo. Stephanopolous.

Your often cited source, Nate Silver, examined the history. More than half the nominations went to the favorite/obvious leader. Silver made the same comment that I did on Romney in 2012 and said Obama wasn’t an upset either as a strong #2 at 22% at this point in 2007.

The biggest upsets were Kerry at 9% at this point in the 2004 nomination and McCain at 16% as I observed. The biggest upset was Bill Clinton at 6% at this point in the 1992 nomination and, going way back when there were few polls at this stage, was Carter for which he gave no number.

But I will guarantee you this about elections in this era vs 1992 and prior, cable news didn’t exist and provide candidates the early exposure that our current era does. Mayor Pete, Amy, and Kamala having gotten tons of exposure compared to Clinton and Carter, and they haven’t busted through. In fact, all of been fairly flat, or down in Harris’s case, since their early exposure in the debates and campaigning.

Buttigieg is putting his eggs in the Iowa basket, and hoping that it propels him into the mix with the other 3. If not, it’s over. And if so, it might only make him the next Rick Santorum. He’s not polling well with blacks and he’s even with Trump in head to head polling. That is significant.

IMO, Bernie will fade out and this will be a choice of Biden vs Warren. And as that occurs, Biden’s flaws will be even more spotlighted and Warren’s ridiculous spending and priorities will be crushed under the weight of reality.

So I will ask again howie, what’s the percent that represents “a decent chance” for someone outside the top 3?
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/03/buttigieg-fourth-warren-second-nationally-poll

"
Buttigieg has surged to second in Iowa, the first state to vote. According to the realclearpolitics.com polling average, Warren leads there with 22.3%. Buttigieg is on 17%, Biden on 15.7% and Sanders on 15.3%.
"

3mo to go until Iowa. The trend has been: someone surges, then everyone turns all attention on them and attacks. Let's see whatcha got on Pete. So far from what I've seen on here, it is little and nothing.
Corporate America (i.e. The DNC) doesn't want a Communist. Warren & Sanders are so bad, their plans so unrealistic and damaging to them, that the corporations would rather have Trump. From their perspective Trump will work with corporations, so long as they're trying to better the United States & US workers, he just won't support their globalist ambitions. The Communists Warren & Sanders will try to destroy the corporations and have the govt take control.

What the corporations are looking for is a mainstream D who will do as they're told & advance the globalist agenda, over an American one. Biden is their chosen candidate, but he's a sure loser. The corporations include the MSM, so they have the ability to push candidates, or hurt candidates. They're now going to push Buttigieg & see if he can gain any traction. Don't be shocked if Klobuchar gets a sniff from them too. Ultimately none of them stand a chance against Trump & Hillary (the corporate wet-dream) will jump in late in the game hoping a last minute announcement will generate excitement. It won't.
 
Last edited:

howeda7

Well-known member
This was the subject of a segment on This Week w/ Geo. Stephanopolous.

Your often cited source, Nate Silver, examined the history. More than half the nominations went to the favorite/obvious leader. Silver made the same comment that I did on Romney in 2012 and said Obama wasn’t an upset either as a strong #2 at 22% at this point in 2007.

The biggest upsets were Kerry at 9% at this point in the 2004 nomination and McCain at 16% as I observed. The biggest upset was Bill Clinton at 6% at this point in the 1992 nomination and, going way back when there were few polls at this stage, was Carter for which he gave no number.

But I will guarantee you this about elections in this era vs 1992 and prior, cable news didn’t exist and provide candidates the early exposure that our current era does. Mayor Pete, Amy, and Kamala having gotten tons of exposure compared to Clinton and Carter, and they haven’t busted through. In fact, all of been fairly flat, or down in Harris’s case, since their early exposure in the debates and campaigning.

Buttigieg is putting his eggs in the Iowa basket, and hoping that it propels him into the mix with the other 3. If not, it’s over. And if so, it might only make him the next Rick Santorum. He’s not polling well with blacks and he’s even with Trump in head to head polling. That is significant.

IMO, Bernie will fade out and this will be a choice of Biden vs Warren. And as that occurs, Biden’s flaws will be even more spotlighted and Warren’s ridiculous spending and priorities will be crushed under the weight of reality.

So I will ask again howie, what’s the percent that represents “a decent chance” for someone outside the top 3?
20% chance it's someone outside the top 3.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Straight white conservative men can hardly say anything anymore! They're the true victims and are losing more rights every day. This guy is on your team.

OMG!!! A country commissioner said something!!! This is outrageous. We must impeach Trump!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

KillerGopherFan

Active member
20% chance it's someone outside the top 3.
My definition of “decent shot” is higher than yours. I’d said 20% would describe “possible, but not likely”.

You were so optimistic that you criticized my scenario by suggesting that I don’t have a historical perspective on primaries, then go on to say there’s a 20% chance I’m wrong. Wow, that’s pretty critical of my analysis. There’s an 80% chance I’m right, and I don’t know what I’m talking about?

In any case, I think it’s unlikely that anyone of those 3 (Pete, Amy, Kamala) will overtake the top candidates of Biden, Warren, or Bernie. And if one does crack the top 3, I’d say it would be Mayor Pete, and I don’t think he come out on top unless Biden completely melts down. That’s his best chance. Then, as I said, he’s polling evenly with Trump, and I know how you trust polling.

In fact, Warren’s best chance to beat Biden is if Bernie drops and Buttigieg gets in the top 3 and splits the alleged moderate Dem vote. Another nightmare.

With the IG report coming, the Durham investigation occurring, and I’ll predict an increasingly unpopular impeachment proceeding, and these Dem candidates, it isn’t shaping up well for the Blue team.

And, there’s only a couple weeks before any outsider can get into the race without handicapping themselves by not being able to compete in states that have candidate registration deadlines quickly approaching. Hillary is just itching to get in with this Democrat field, but she better hurry.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Let’s see if Butti’s Iowa surge goes anywhere before declaring this or that chance for someone outside the supposed top 3 (I have a difficult time seeing how Sanders can do anything except be a spoiler).
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
From the very, very little I've seen in off YouTube clips, Amy did not seem to have a "strong" appearance on the stage. Happy to be wrong on this, if I'm wrong (like I said, I've seen little).

That would leave Harris and Booker, potentially as moderate candidates, if you assume it wouldn't be Amy or Pete (not that I have or that I think there is, a good reason to do that).


Harris had a surge but it didn't stick. I don't know why that is. Booker (nor Amy) has had a surge yet, and I don't know why that is.


I think basically, if it's gonna be someone other than Biden as a realistic, non-Warren/Sanders candidate, they're going to suddenly start surging as we get closer to Iowa and have a strong showing there, out of nowhere (in the sense of all this big run-up/build-up on the Dem side). Let's see if that materializes, or if Biden is gonna pull it off.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Harris had a surge but it didn't stick. I don't know why that is. Booker (nor Amy) has had a surge yet, and I don't know why that is.
Because Tulsi destroyed her.

The problem with counting on back benchers like Pete and Corey and Amy is that they've never faced any real heat. Especially Pete. I mean, there was an officer involved shooting in South Bend and some kind of town hall, and he was a disaster. it's easy to stand on stage and spout platitudes when no one is focused on you, and there isn't any heat. Kamala had a little heat on her and completely wilted. Her town halls were a joke, every answer was "I think we should look into that".

There just doesn't seem to be a single competent Democrat running for the nomination, and Warren's disastrous Medicare for All plan could sink her candidacy.
 

bga1

Active member
Huh, this is odd. Polls show that Trump is doing better with Blacks and Hispanics than polls showed in 2016... Also, Trump is leading in swing states against the socialists but not against Biden. Biden will not make it to the Dem nomination. Polls like this show why the Dems feel that they have to get rid of Trump before the election. They won't be able to win fairly.

 

GopherJake

Active member
There just doesn't seem to be a single competent Democrat running for the nomination, and Warren's disastrous Medicare for All plan could sink her candidacy.
It wouldn't matter who the Ds put on stage, you wouldn't think any of them were competent because you equate seeing the world the same as you with competence. Your view on the quality of D candidates is as useless as BGAs.

<iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.2d991e3dfc9abb2549972ce8b64c5d85.html?origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.forums.gopherhole.com" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe"></iframe>
 

JimmyJamesMD

Active member
Because Tulsi destroyed her.

The problem with counting on back benchers like Pete and Corey and Amy is that they've never faced any real heat. Especially Pete. I mean, there was an officer involved shooting in South Bend and some kind of town hall, and he was a disaster. it's easy to stand on stage and spout platitudes when no one is focused on you, and there isn't any heat. Kamala had a little heat on her and completely wilted. Her town halls were a joke, every answer was "I think we should look into that".

There just doesn't seem to be a single competent Democrat running for the nomination, and Warren's disastrous Medicare for All plan could sink her candidacy.
How dare you
 
Top Bottom