Page 1 of 15

2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:18 am
by WeiWenDi
Aaaaaaaaand it's that time of year again, folks! On the Republican side we have:

Donald John 'The Con' TRUMP!

And so far on the Democratic side we've got:

John 'Whozzat?' Delaney!
Tulsi 'A-Team' Gabbard!
Julián 'Brain Juice' Castro!
Kirsten 'That's Not Funny' Gillibrand!
Kamala 'Lock Em Up' Harris!
Pete 'I'm Really Sorry About Your Unfortunate Surname' Buttigieg!
Cory 'Pill Pop' Booker!
Elizabeth '23AndMe' Warren!
Amy 'The Stapler' Klobuchar!

and last...

but not least...

Bernie Bernie Bernie Bernie Bernie
Ben Elias Elias Elias Elias Elias
SAAAAAAAAAAAAAANDEEEEEEEEEEERS!

(Clearly I don't have a favourite or anything.)

Anyway, please consider this a reserved space for polite, civil discussion of the upcoming Democratic primaries and 2020 presidential election. And go!

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 5:23 am
by agga
I'll vote for Bernie Sanders again, sure, why not?

Trump can't win again, can he? Can he really?

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 10:49 am
by Sun Fin
Being a Brit the only names I recognise on those lists are Trump and Saunders. Anyone want to give us a brief overview of the others? There have also been persistent rumours this side of the pond that Michelle Obama would run. Is that just wishful thinking from a particular demographic?

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:59 pm
by Shikanosuke
Perhaps I'm a negative nancy but even with discontent rising against him, I just see Saunders splitting the vote and Trump claiming a second victory.

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2019 4:32 pm
by Jia Nanfeng
Tulsi Gabbard would be the only candidate on the Dem side that I’d consider voting for. Sadly I don’t think she has much of a chance to get the nomination.

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 9:22 pm
by WeiWenDi
agga wrote:I'll vote for Bernie Sanders again, sure, why not?

Trump can't win again, can he? Can he really?


Good man! But oh, he can. I feel like the press seriously underestimated him last time out. Whoever picks up the Dem nomination had better have, not only a clear consistent message, but also a sound offensive strategy in the swing states.

Sun Fin wrote:Being a Brit the only names I recognise on those lists are Trump and Saunders. Anyone want to give us a brief overview of the others? There have also been persistent rumours this side of the pond that Michelle Obama would run. Is that just wishful thinking from a particular demographic?


So, here's my rundown, for what it's worth.

John Delaney: Rep from Maryland. First guy to throw his hat in the ring; he's had his campaign up since '17. But seriously, I don't know a thing about him other than that.
Tulsi Gabbard: Senator from Hawaii; Army vet. I've been paying some attention to her. She's a bit of an oddball, but by no means a bad one. As Jia Nanfang says below, she does have some appeal! She's basically running her campaign on national security and IR issues: namely, she wants to see a drawdown of current military involvements abroad and a detente with Russia, which is good. She's pretty much a standard progressive Democrat on most other issues including universal healthcare, but she has a socially-conservative past (anti-SSM, anti-abortion) that seemed for awhile to be coming back to haunt her. One other big positive point for her campaign? She's not taking money from big donors. Clearly she wants to adopt the Bernie strategy.
Julián Castro: HUD Sec under Obama. Kind of a wonky technocrat. Clearly angling after the Obama vote. First said he wouldn't take any PAC money; later reneged on that promise.
Kirsten Gillibrand: Senator from New York, filling Clinton's vacant seat. Originally a Blue Dog / New Democrat hard centrist and deficit hawk, but is busy trying to reinvent herself as a progressive firebrand. (For example: she now supports Medicare for All, wants a jobs guarantee and wants to abolish ICE.) Positive point for me: she has basically voted against all military budget increases and foreign engagements while Trump has been in office.
Kamala Harris: Former AG and Senator from California. Basically a centrist, though she has also moved somewhat to the left since running for the presidency. She's gotten some deserved flak for her stances on criminal justice and incarceration.
Pete Buttigieg: Mayor of South Bend, Indiana. Poor bloke - no way on earth he's going to escape jokes about his last name. I don't know that much about his positions.
Cory Booker: Senator from New Jersey. Popular impression is that he's kind of a sleaze - he's taken big donations from pharmaceutical companies in the past and has failed to hold their feet to the fire over rising drug prices.
Liz Warren: Senator from Massachusetts. Generally a darling on the progressive left, she has long been an advocate for state-funded education and student loan forgiveness. However, she's not very politically savvy. She recently took a genetic test to try to prove that she was part-American Indian, which backfired drastically when she made the results public. (If she's Indian at all, it's so far back in her ancestry that it's statistically insignificant.)
Amy Klobuchar: Our somewhat useless and notoriously short-tempered Senator from Minnesota. (She routinely throws things at her staffers and says that they're worthless.) In general, I think she's hawkish on foreign policy and a mushy centrist on most everything else.
Andrew Yang: Forgot this guy the first time around! Taiwanese-American businessman from New York. He's running a rather strange campaign that seems to me to be mostly based on the adoption of a nationwide universal basic income. Interesting idea; haven't decided if I'm for or against it yet, but lean against.
Howard Schultz: Forgot this guy too. Former CEO of Starbucks. Trying to run as a technocratic centrist who's progressive on social issues; I'm not sure he really has any independent ideas of his own.

There's also Jay Inslee (Governor of Washington State who declared just today), Marianne Williamson (popular author from California) and John Hickenlooper (former governor of Colorado, slated to declare his candidacy next week). There are a whole slew of others who are 'interested' but who haven't declared anything publicly yet.

So far my favourite of the presidential candidates are Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard. I don't have any candidates that I actively dislike so far, except perhaps Amy Klobuchar.

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:28 am
by Dong Zhou
Thanks WWD, only ones I had heard of is Elizabeth Warren and Sanders

Kamala Harris: Former AG and Senator from California. Basically a centrist, though she has also moved somewhat to the left since running for the presidency. She's gotten some deserved flak for her stances on criminal justice and incarceration.


I assume she is on the lock em up strand of justice thinking?

Cory Booker: Senator from New Jersey. Popular impression is that he's kind of a sleaze - he's taken big donations from pharmaceutical companies in the past and has failed to hold their feet to the fire over rising drug prices.


That issue alone (which I can see being damaging) or other things on top of that lead to sleaze?

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2019 12:32 am
by agga
We actually gave Andrew Yang twenty bucks this week, so while he has like zero chance of winning the nomination, I at least hope he and his weird ideas get more than zero visibility. He'd be a good department secretary or something.

I like Liz Warren, I'm glad to have voted for her back in 2012 when we lived in MA. I think she'd be a great president. She needs to figure out some way to own the Pocahontas thing. It's so, so stupid and insulting and racist etc, but it's troubling that she's failed so far.

Who seems like they could win... I want to think Bernie Sanders could do it. Kamala Harris seems like the on-paper best of the group, though I don't think the US is ready to elect a non-white woman (would be happy to be proven wrong).

Cory Booker is super annoying. Inslee is going to run as the environmentalist candidate which I'm all for but it won't work. No special feelings re any of the others...

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Sun Mar 03, 2019 8:53 am
by Sun Fin
Thanks WWD!

WeiWenDi wrote:
Tulsi Gabbard: Senator from Hawaii; Army vet. I've been paying some attention to her. She's a bit of an oddball, but by no means a bad one. As Jia Nanfang says below, she does have some appeal! She's basically running her campaign on national security and IR issues: namely, she wants to see a drawdown of current military involvements abroad and a detente with Russia, which is good. She's pretty much a standard progressive Democrat on most other issues including universal healthcare, but she has a socially-conservative past (anti-SSM, anti-abortion) that seemed for awhile to be coming back to haunt her. One other big positive point for her campaign? She's not taking money from big donors. Clearly she wants to adopt the Bernie strategy.


Any hint she moved to the more liberal side to make herself more palatable to the Democrat constituency rather than due to an ideological change?

I'm looking forward to following your debates!

Do you think it's likely that there will be a strong Republican challenger to Trump?

Re: 2020 US Presidential Election Speculation

Unread postPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:35 pm
by WeiWenDi
Dong Zhou wrote:Thanks WWD, only ones I had heard of is Elizabeth Warren and Sanders


My pleasure, Dong Zhou! I hope I'm making it clear right now that there is a lot about some of these candidates that I still don't know.

Dong Zhou wrote:I assume she is on the lock em up strand of justice thinking?


Yeeeeeah. There's a quote of hers as AG from around 2010 about wanting to charge parents of truant schoolchildren with criminal neglect. That's gotten her some flak.

Dong Zhou wrote:That issue alone (which I can see being damaging) or other things on top of that lead to sleaze?


I think it's mostly the pharma thing. And you're right, that's bad enough. But I think there's also the general perception of NJ politics as dirty (not entirely inaccurate), and with Booker himself there's still some baggage from when he was in local politics - FBI and USAG investigations into nepotism and favouritism while he was in office, giving positions to unqualified people, things like that.

agga wrote:We actually gave Andrew Yang twenty bucks this week, so while he has like zero chance of winning the nomination, I at least hope he and his weird ideas get more than zero visibility. He'd be a good department secretary or something.

I like Liz Warren, I'm glad to have voted for her back in 2012 when we lived in MA. I think she'd be a great president. She needs to figure out some way to own the Pocahontas thing. It's so, so stupid and insulting and racist etc, but it's troubling that she's failed so far.

Who seems like they could win... I want to think Bernie Sanders could do it. Kamala Harris seems like the on-paper best of the group, though I don't think the US is ready to elect a non-white woman (would be happy to be proven wrong).

Cory Booker is super annoying. Inslee is going to run as the environmentalist candidate which I'm all for but it won't work. No special feelings re any of the others...


I like Yang, actually. Not as much as Bernie or Tulsi, but enough that I'd consider voting for the guy. Warren, I'm not so hot on - mostly because her foreign policy positions are those of a standard-issue liberal hawk. (I did like her stance on TPP, though!)

Again, I know next to nothing about Inslee.

Sun Fin wrote:Any hint she moved to the more liberal side to make herself more palatable to the Democrat constituency rather than due to an ideological change?


Good question! I've got no idea.

Her legislative record has given her 100% ratings from EMILY's List, though, which isn't comforting - whether or not it stems from a change in personal conviction or tacking to the political winds.

Sun Fin wrote:I'm looking forward to following your debates!

Do you think it's likely that there will be a strong Republican challenger to Trump?


Thanks, Sun Fin! Early days yet. There will be plenty of time to read up.

Nope. There won't be. The Republican base loves Trump; I just can't see how an incumbent would manage to siphon off that base of support.

That's not to say there aren't challengers. Former Libertarian Party candidate Bill Weld has thrown his hat in the ring, and former Ohio governor John Kasich says he's thinking about it. But quite frankly, I don't give them much for their chances.