2020 US General Election Thread IV: The Battle Begins

[Cisairse]

Some states don't allow write-ins at all, and many others only count write-ins for people who registered for them.

New Hampshire is a write-in state (it's also easy to get on the ballot, hence so many) but even they don't record the write-ins unless there's a viable number. How they decide viable I forget.

I wonder if you can write yourself in…?

Mitt Romney famously voted for his wife in the 2016 presidential election.

[Arlenton]

Anyone else think Warren is running for the VP spot?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Anyone else think Warren is running for the VP spot?

I don't. She's just hanging in on the chance her luck changes and polls of 12% turn to results of 15% plus.
I doubt she'll make it to Super Tuesday, then she'll go back to being a Senator.
Many nominees have a previous failed primary run on their resume, it's practice I think.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I wonder if you can write yourself in…?

Yes

But it won't necessarily be counted (except as "write in") and if it's not counted it's not published.

[Imperial Joseon]

Anyone else think Warren is running for the VP spot?

Reminds me of Palin.

[Sougra]

Anyone else think Warren is running for the VP spot?

I think that's a strong possibility. However, it's dependent on who's VP. Bernie is questionable now, although she was almost guaranteed that previously, aside from a few other possibilities. Her focus on praising Klobuchar, to me, is signalling to the moderates that she'll be supportive of them, and still bring some of the progressives who support her along to grant them some legitimacy from them.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Anyone else think Warren is running for the VP spot?

I think that's a strong possibility. However, it's dependent on who's VP. Bernie is questionable now, although she was almost guaranteed that previously, aside from a few other possibilities. Her focus on praising Klobuchar, to me, is signalling to the moderates that she'll be supportive of them, and still bring some of the progressives who support her along to grant them some legitimacy from them.

Interesting. I'd just assumed that Warren's supporters would go 80% or so to Sanders, if she dropped out and endorsed him. But if she endorsed Klobuchar instead then who knows?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Anyone else think Warren is running for the VP spot?

Reminds me of Palin.

Why? They're very different.

[Imperial Joseon]

Reminds me of Palin.

Why? They're very different.

Both have some similarities, although in different geographical areas.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Why? They're very different.

Both have some similarities, although in different geographical areas.

Warren is a serving Senator, Palin was a resigned Alaska governor (quit before her term was up)
Warren is contesting the party nomination, Palin wasn't contesting anything
Warren is way smart and has a bunch of policies, Palin was thick as a brick and had no policies
Warren is from Massachusetts, Palin was from Alaska
Warren is medium/old, Palin was quite young (by standards of that level of politics)

Against what? They're both women?

[Imperial Joseon]

Both have some similarities, although in different geographical areas.

Warren is a serving Senator, Palin was a resigned Alaska governor (quit before her term was up)
Warren is contesting the party nomination, Palin wasn't contesting anything
Warren is way smart and has a bunch of policies, Palin was thick as a brick and had no policies
Warren is from Massachusetts, Palin was from Alaska
Warren is medium/old, Palin was quite young (by standards of that level of politics)

Against what? They're both women?

Yeah, both women was what I was trying to convey. Also, I stated they're from different areas.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Warren is a serving Senator, Palin was a resigned Alaska governor (quit before her term was up)
Warren is contesting the party nomination, Palin wasn't contesting anything
Warren is way smart and has a bunch of policies, Palin was thick as a brick and had no policies
Warren is from Massachusetts, Palin was from Alaska
Warren is medium/old, Palin was quite young (by standards of that level of politics)

Against what? They're both women?

Yeah, both women was what I was trying to convey. Also, I stated they're from different areas.

I'm less outraged than you might expect. Choosing a female running-mate might look like pandering.

[Imperial Joseon]

I'm less outraged than you might expect. Choosing a female running-mate might look like pandering.

Didn't mean to outrage you. Sorry.

[Genivaria]

My top issue is definitely healthcare with raising the minimum wage and protecting unions as a close second.

[Bear Stearns]

My top issues in order of priority are:

1) Immigration (hard restrictionist)
2) Foreign policy (anti-war, non-interventionism)
3) Environment (I don't see this realistically being solved by either party)
4) Economy (I side with Democrats on economics)

What ideology are you exactly?

Nationalist

[Genivaria]

What ideology are you exactly?

Nationalist

I've certainly seen worse nationalist ideologies.
Do you support conscription??

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I'm less outraged than you might expect. Choosing a female running-mate might look like pandering.

Didn't mean to outrage you. Sorry.

Not much. If the Dems somehow choose a young nominee (ie Buttigieg) then an older woman might work.

Whether Warren would take the offer is another matter. Being from Massachusetts, she can keep the Senate seat while running and only has to give it up if she wins.

[Sougra]

I think that's a strong possibility. However, it's dependent on who's VP. Bernie is questionable now, although she was almost guaranteed that previously, aside from a few other possibilities. Her focus on praising Klobuchar, to me, is signalling to the moderates that she'll be supportive of them, and still bring some of the progressives who support her along to grant them some legitimacy from them.

Interesting. I'd just assumed that Warren's supporters would go 80% or so to Sanders, if she dropped out and endorsed him. But if she endorsed Klobuchar instead then who knows?

Well, she's kind of burning some of the bridges she had with the Sanders crowd. The whole narrative of Sanders saying a woman can't win and her stating it's true, whether the story is true or not because we can't know, as well as her criticizing him far more openly (having her volunteers give arguments why people should support her and not Sanders (which is what she previously criticized him for and stated that as being an attack), that part of the debate where she subtly argued that Sanders takes PAC money, but she and Klobuchar don't through omission, and her supporting the Culinary Union) is not making friends of out of Bernie supporters or making her supporters have an affinity for Bernie.

Her supporters are generally split between the Buttigieg, Klobuchar, and Sanders groups, as far as I can tell. Although I believe a small majority of her supporters have Bernie as their second choice.

And whether you like her or not, or are a Sanders supporter or not, her repeated focus repeatedly is far more against Bernie than it was previously, and that's pretty apparent. Sanders on the other hand, hasn't said anything negative about her, other than that volunteer script from a while back, which has some doubt raised as to who made it or how involved Sanders was, whether you consider that valid or not.

She may endorse him or she may endorse Klobuchar. She's attempting to play this game of being the middle of progressives and moderates, and that can definitely work and is a valid strategy, but it's done in such a way where I feel many people who don't have her as her first choice feel like she's doing it for personal gain and not because she genuinely is that candidate. Then again, my reading of that could be totally wrong.

So, I think for her and her campaign, it's going to be a political calculation. Does she endorse a Klobuchar and have a way to play ball if there's a moderate nominee and be involved, while risking the support of progressives? Does she stick by her long time friend Bernie and potentially gain progressive support, even though he might lose and isn't popular among the establishment, which risks moderate voters? Or maybe she doesn't make an endorsement at all like in 2016?

Only time will tell what she decides if she gets out of the race.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Trying to appeal to progressives and to moderates should be a good strategy, but Warren's numbers say it isn't working.

Progressives care about policy, but moderates are a bit afraid of it. They prefer vague statements which "feel" right, with policies there, but never put front and center. Policies are a means to an end, and shouldn't even be mentioned except in the context of achieving a goal (like health coverage for everyone).

So if she could start again, I'd tell Warren to have all those policies there on her website (for anyone who is interested, that is mainly progressives) but not to talk about them at every opportunity. She might have a chance of getting votes from both factions.

Or not. Maybe it's just not possible with factional entrenchment within the party. I will say the whole field have taken on some progressive policies ... like $15 minimum wage. Even Bloomberg has that.

[Sougra]

Trying to appeal to progressives and to moderates should be a good strategy, but Warren's numbers say it isn't working.

Progressives care about policy, but moderates are a bit afraid of it. They prefer vague statements which "feel" right, with policies there, but never put front and center. Policies are a means to an end, and shouldn't even be mentioned except in the context of achieving a goal (like health coverage for everyone).

So if she could start again, I'd tell Warren to have all those policies there on her website (for anyone who is interested, that is mainly progressives) but not to talk about them at every opportunity. She might have a chance of getting votes from both factions.

Or not. Maybe it's just not possible with factional entrenchment within the party. I will say the whole field have taken on some progressive policies ... like $15 minimum wage. Even Bloomberg has that.

That could work. The thing that Sanders does well that Warren doesn't, I think, is that Warren goes into the minutiae of "this is what we're going to do, and how," which is cool, but can be boring and make people see more holes in what you're presenting, while Sanders attacks the morality of what he's against in very passionate terms.

People are far more likely, in my eyes, to accept the "this is wrong, and this is why" argument, rather than the "this is how we fix this." Because people can disagree with your approach far more easily than why you oppose it.

So I'd say that I disagree as to the what you'd advise Warren to do, but you're not wrong in identifying what's wrong. (The coincidence of the statement above and this one matching was not intended, but are welcome)

And the field has largely gone for the progressive ideas, without question, because Bernie made it apparent that they're popular. The issue is whether said candidates will do anything about it.

[Corrian]

It's briefly amusing to consider a Bloomberg/Hillary team beating Trump, if just for the outrage it would cause among Trump and his loyalists.

Sadly, I'm not that invested in salt mining the opposition despite the costs.

Oh it gets better now people are saying that if Bloomberg doesn't get Hillary he should get Romney.... so according to these people the miracle way to defeat the 2020 Republican party would be to simply become the 2012 Republican party.

Sad that so many of the anti-Trump branch of the Republican party have decided to try and hijack the Democratic party.

Remember when Bernie was supposedly hijacking the party and they cared so much? We're hijacking the party way less than they're now trying to do. Hypocrites. Everyone's a bunch of hypocrites.

[Corrian]

God no. I wouldn't vote President at all.

Not even a write in? I'm thinking of either Martin Sheen or Jimmy Smits

Maybe Vermin Supreme

[The East Marches II]

It's briefly amusing to consider a Bloomberg/Hillary team beating Trump, if just for the outrage it would cause among Trump and his loyalists.

Sadly, I'm not that invested in salt mining the opposition despite the costs.

Oh it gets better now people are saying that if Bloomberg doesn't get Hillary he should get Romney.... so according to these people the miracle way to defeat the 2020 Republican party would be to simply become the 2012 Republican party.

Sad that so many of the anti-Trump branch of the Republican party have decided to try and hijack the Democratic party.

Am I alive right now?

[Post War America]

Not even a write in? I'm thinking of either Martin Sheen or Jimmy Smits

Maybe Vermin Supreme

Specifically my ticket would be "The Reanimated Corpse of Eugene V Debs".

[LRON]

It's briefly amusing to consider a Bloomberg/Hillary team beating Trump, if just for the outrage it would cause among Trump and his loyalists.

Sadly, I'm not that invested in salt mining the opposition despite the costs.

Oh it gets better now people are saying that if Bloomberg doesn't get Hillary he should get Romney.... so according to these people the miracle way to defeat the 2020 Republican party would be to simply become the 2012 Republican party.

Sad that so many of the anti-Trump branch of the Republican party have decided to try and hijack the Democratic party.

Why are you upset? I thought Americans long bemoaned their two party system, perhaps you obtain a three or four party system now. I think it is quite evident at this time that the Democrats will split after the Trump fiasco is over, whether it be through his defeat or reelection. The Republicans will probably hold on a bit longer but even then you can already see the coming divide and rupture. Isn't this the future American reformists wanted? Multiple parties, more voices, more diverse political opinions? Well, here you have it!