2020 Candidate Speculation

[richard]

The point of this thread is to discuss the candidates, yes? I think it’s a valid criticism even if I might not land on the same take.

Although @heartbot, that post might be the longest fucking post I’ve ever seen. Please no.

[ladybrienne]

Mar 31, 2019 8:58:42 GMT -6 jaygee said:

I think this is an important conversation and push back to have and I’m not sure why we are pushing back on a dissenting view.

To me we have to push for the very best candidate. If we don’t do that during the primary time we will have really done a disservice to our chance to win. In 2016 the complaint was that their was a “chosen” candidate and we didn’t get a chance to vet the best candidate and now we have that chance and we are going to be thin skinned about criticism of anyone running?

No one is pushing back. I actually agree with a good portion. But the sweeping generalizations I’m not here for. And I find a lot of it fucking rude and dismissive.

[ladybrienne]

God forbid anyone point out something else that could have contributed to the 2016 dumpster fire.

[richard]

Shit like this is the reason we basically got banished to our own board and most of HIH won’t come here

What is this shit? I love you but this doesn’t ring true to me at all.

[richard]

I know my own personal biases and I 100% would have told Bernie to fuck off. I think I actually did earlier in this thread for something very similar.

[jkjacq]

My last take on 2016

We forget that she won the popular vote by quite a bit. So while the orange one has been installed he did not convince the majority of voting Americans

That tiny bit keeps me hopeful for 2020 regardless of the rampant racism and misogyny.

@heartbot made very salient points and I don’t disagree with them.

But what’s missing in them is the human factor and most people who aren’t as politically engaged as us aren’t taking those polls. The average Joe or Jane who is ‘comfortable’ in their life, who aren’t impacted in their day to day life are only hearing what they want to hear. Because human nature doesn’t want to leave their zone.

[jaygee]

Mar 31, 2019 9:21:14 GMT -6 richard said:

I know my own personal biases and I 100% would have told Bernie to fuck off. I think I actually did earlier in this thread for something very similar.

I appreciate this being pointed out and totally agree. I kind of shrugged off the coastal elite thing from Mayor Pete but I would have been pissed if Bernie or Biden said this. So yeah, I need to sit with that.

[doublestuf]

@heartbot, FWIW, I understand that you are angry and may need to take a break. I personally find your perspectives and responses thoughtful, measured, and hit right at the heart of the issues. In no way do I think you can be blamed for anything else that has happened over the history of this board (or before when we were a thread on on GD). In my opinion, you do not post in a way that is alarmist or extreme in nature. Please just know that your input is valued here.

[ladybrienne]

Mar 31, 2019 8:51:13 GMT -6 jaygee said:

But economic anxiety is not unique to the Midwest or white people.

Black woman have economic anxiety and they didn’t vote for Trump.

No one is saying this isn’t true anywhere in this convo.

[jaygee]

I think the key to success in 2020 is mobilizing new or inconsistent voters. If a candidate thinks their key is winning back moderates who voted for T and not expanding the pie because of a bad take on what actually happened in 2016, that’s potentially an issue.

[jaygee]

Mar 31, 2019 9:39:14 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

Mar 31, 2019 8:51:13 GMT -6 jaygee said:

But economic anxiety is not unique to the Midwest or white people.

Black woman have economic anxiety and they didn’t vote for Trump.

No one is saying this isn’t true anywhere in this convo.

But that’s the gist of what Mayor Pete (and other Dems) is saying. That we need to win back the voters that T won because he spoke to their economic anxiety. That when coastal elites focus on the racism and injustice, they turn off the voters that are solely focused on economic issues. That’s a bad take because it’s not based on reality of what actually happened in 2016. The worry is that it takes the campaign down a bad path of focusing on the wrong voters. Campaigns gotta be tight in 2020.

Also, I mean don’t piss of Hillary voters. They voted. They are on lock.

[jaygee]

Welp. That sucks.

[richard]

I think the problem with Mayor Pete's quote is that it did make it sound like it was a single factor: "“Donald Trump got elected because, in his twisted way, he pointed out the huge troubles in our economy and our democracy."

I don't think any of us think that one reason is the only reason and I don't think Pete thinks that's true either - he's too smart for that. But he phrased it that way. Whether that was a mistake or a strategy, we'll see.

Even if it is a strategy at the moment, I *could* understand why given that he's a solid underdog and would need to do really well in Iowa/NH. Not that I'd agree with it, but I could see the need.

I'm just rambling at this point.

[teatime]

I think it’s really important that Democrats be able to criticize the campaign that was run in 2016. There is always room for improvement, and some of the messaging didn’t reach people in the most effective way. The party/candidates/constituents have to be able to do so in a constructive way without being slammed on Twitter by former HRC campaign staff at every turn, or otherwise I don’t know how you finally move beyond the specter of 2016.

[miawallace]

Mar 31, 2019 9:51:53 GMT -6 teatime said:

I think it’s really important that Democrats be able to criticize the campaign that was run in 2016. There is always room for improvement, and some of the messaging didn’t reach people in the most effective way. The party/candidates/constituents have to be able to do so in a constructive way without being slammed on Twitter by former HRC campaign staff at every turn, or otherwise I don’t know how you finally move beyond the specter of 2016.

and criticize current candidates too.
Or the Democratic Party.

[doublestuf]

I hope everyone can take a deep breath and pause before people start deactivating. Maybe that won't happen but it seems like it could be a possibility. We don't typically have a lot of infighting in here, so it feels very uncomfortable.

I think as mostly white women, we have to realize that we have been wired by society to deflect and shift blame when racism comes up (I know we know this, but in this moment it doesn't seem like it). A person who is a really well loved candidate of this board made a questionable comment that can't be overlooked. Even if you find yourself not disagreeing with him, you owe to a lot of people who don't look like you to at least consider that it could rub others the wrong way. A few of the black women I follow on Twitter have spoken out against his comments too, which tells me everything I need to know.

I don't think we need to rehash everything in 2016 to remember that hatred, racism, misogyny, and xenophobia were no small part (I guess whether you want to believe is the biggest part is what we are debating) of Trump's success.

And there's definitely a middle ground, which @heartbot made really clear...it's okay to criticize Pete! He is a white dude. It is very much a possibility that he makes some missteps no matter his background or how amazingly smart he is. No one is saying he is done and throw him under the bus. Are we watching to see how he responds to the criticism and what he says going into the future? I guarantee you black women (and others) will, for instance. They are tired of being forced to vote for more of the same, and I don't think it needs to be said that their vote is crucial.

[jaygee]

Well said doublestuf.

[ladybrienne]

Mar 31, 2019 9:47:27 GMT -6 jaygee said:

Mar 31, 2019 9:39:14 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

No one is saying this isn’t true anywhere in this convo.

But that’s the gist of what Mayor Pete (and other Dems) is saying. That we need to win back the voters that T won because he spoke to their economic anxiety. That when coastal elites focus on the racism and injustice, they turn off the voters that are solely focused on economic issues. That’s a bad take because it’s not based on reality of what actually happened in 2016. The worry is that it takes the campaign down a bad path of focusing on the wrong voters. Campaigns gotta be tight in 2020.

Also, I mean don’t piss of Hillary voters. They voted. They are on lock.

All I am saying is it’s okay and possible to agree with that stance but also point out other factors. Nothing more and nothing less than that. It doesn’t make me a jerk. It’s possible to be on board with that and still feel that there were other factors at play and that there is much to unpack from 2016. That’s literally all I am saying here. I think a lot of the conclusions that heartbot jumped to about people on this board she’s been posting with were OTT. Literally all I’m saying

[miawallace]

For what it’s worth, I didn’t read the whole exchange but @heartbot has mostly been someone who has communicated my thoughts and feelings really well before. I hope you stay and continue to contribute.
Im clumsy with words so she’s good at that.
She’s been the voice in my head when I’m too word clumsy. For that I wish she would continue to post.

[doublestuf]

Mar 31, 2019 10:03:08 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

Mar 31, 2019 9:47:27 GMT -6 jaygee said:

But that’s the gist of what Mayor Pete (and other Dems) is saying. That we need to win back the voters that T won because he spoke to their economic anxiety. That when coastal elites focus on the racism and injustice, they turn off the voters that are solely focused on economic issues. That’s a bad take because it’s not based on reality of what actually happened in 2016. The worry is that it takes the campaign down a bad path of focusing on the wrong voters. Campaigns gotta be tight in 2020.

Also, I mean don’t piss of Hillary voters. They voted. They are on lock.

All I am saying is it’s okay and possible to agree with that stance but also point out other factors. Nothing more and nothing less than that. It doesn’t make me a jerk. It’s possible to be on board with that and still feel that there were other factors at play and that there is much to unpack from 2016. That’s literally all I am saying here. I think a lot of the conclusions that heartbot jumped to about people on this board she’s been posting with were OTT. Literally all I’m saying

I think-and you feel free to tell me if I'm wrong-it was "the white supremist" mentions. I can see how that hits a nerve. But, I think by pointing out the "other factors" it immediately starts to deflate the role racism and all other related forms of hatred that went into his win. It immediately starts to look like we (the general we) are being really fragile and defensive.

[Dr. Cox]

Mar 31, 2019 10:06:06 GMT -6 miawallace said:

For what it’s worth, I didn’t read the whole exchange but @heartbot has mostly been someone who has communicated my thoughts and feelings really well before. I hope you stay and continue to contribute.
Im clumsy with words so she’s good at that.
She’s been the voice in my head when I’m too word clumsy. For that I wish she would continue to post.

Same. I hope she comes back. I have thoughts about this whole exchange, but no energy to dive in. Anyway, I know as we head into 2020, we as a board will face many topics and people we disagree on, and I hope we are able to remain a supportive group even when debating these topics.

[Dr. Cox]

Guys, I have had maybe 4 hours of sleep total the past several days so the words are failing me. Apologies in advance for severe lack of clarity.

[doublestuf]

I'm in nap jail, so tell me to STFU whenever you are ready, but this says it so well. Pete of course is not the only one to do this.

[richard]

Honestly, I had been waiting for heartbot to get in this thread and shake shit up because I know she's not afraid to speak her piece. And she makes me think about things after my blood pressure goes back down after reading her posts. I was waiting for her to go in on Kamala and I was preparing my breathing exercises. I'm bummed we didn't get that far.

I think we all need to be a little more open to listening to critiques of candidates. They're going to start lobbing them at each other soon enough and I'm really trying to not dig in and be more comfortable with not having an answer yet.

[ladybrienne]

Mar 31, 2019 10:12:59 GMT -6 doublestuf said:

Mar 31, 2019 10:03:08 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

All I am saying is it’s okay and possible to agree with that stance but also point out other factors. Nothing more and nothing less than that. It doesn’t make me a jerk. It’s possible to be on board with that and still feel that there were other factors at play and that there is much to unpack from 2016. That’s literally all I am saying here. I think a lot of the conclusions that heartbot jumped to about people on this board she’s been posting with were OTT. Literally all I’m saying

I think-and you feel free to tell me if I'm wrong-it was "the white supremist" mentions. I can see how that hits a nerve. But, I think by pointing out the "other factors" it immediately starts to deflate the role racism and all other related forms of hatred that went into his win. It immediately starts to look like we (the general we) are being really fragile and defensive.

I’ve been posting here for a while. I love this place and I love the back and forth and how conversations like this have forced me to look inward and check myself, many times.

I have a problem with the delivery here, and nothing more than that. What I find annoying is that I actually agree with so much of what was said. I’ve said that now 800 times. If pointing out any other factor that could have had an impact on a person’s vote in 2016 besides the fact that they are a flaming racist or okay with a flaming racist and holding their nose while going to the ballot box makes it okay to put people in the extremist box when we have been posting with you for god knows how long, then I don’t know what I’m doing here.

[doublestuf]

Mar 31, 2019 10:19:54 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

Mar 31, 2019 10:12:59 GMT -6 doublestuf said:

I think-and you feel free to tell me if I'm wrong-it was "the white supremist" mentions. I can see how that hits a nerve. But, I think by pointing out the "other factors" it immediately starts to deflate the role racism and all other related forms of hatred that went into his win. It immediately starts to look like we (the general we) are being really fragile and defensive.

I’ve been posting here for a while. I love this place and I love the back and forth and how conversations like this have forced me to look inward and check myself, many times.

I have a problem with the delivery here, and nothing more than that. What I find annoying is that I actually agree with so much of what was said. I’ve said that now 800 times. If pointing out any other factor that could have had an impact on a person’s vote in 2016 besides the fact that they are a flaming racist or okay with a flaming racist and holding their nose while going to the ballot box makes it okay to put people in the extremist box when we have been posting with you for god knows how long, then I don’t know what I’m doing here.

In some ways I see your point. I just think that a white man running for President of our country following the dumpster-fire of Trump just cannot make statements like that.

[richard]

Mar 31, 2019 10:19:54 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

Mar 31, 2019 10:12:59 GMT -6 doublestuf said:

I think-and you feel free to tell me if I'm wrong-it was "the white supremist" mentions. I can see how that hits a nerve. But, I think by pointing out the "other factors" it immediately starts to deflate the role racism and all other related forms of hatred that went into his win. It immediately starts to look like we (the general we) are being really fragile and defensive.

I’ve been posting here for a while. I love this place and I love the back and forth and how conversations like this have forced me to look inward and check myself, many times.

I have a problem with the delivery here, and nothing more than that. What I find annoying is that I actually agree with so much of what was said. I’ve said that now 800 times. If pointing out any other factor that could have had an impact on a person’s vote in 2016 besides the fact that they are a flaming racist or okay with a flaming racist and holding their nose while going to the ballot box makes it okay to put people in the extremist box when we have been posting with you for god knows how long, then I don’t know what I’m doing here.

I honestly think (and I understand why) you are taking this as a personal thing. I think what she was saying is: if after all the conversations we've had in the last 2 years about racist family members, racism's role in Trump's win, etc, that this thread could not wrestle with what he said and have space to be critical of it, that's a problem for her.

She's not putting you or misspatty in an extremist box. She was saying what was the point of having all those conversations if we - as a thread- then don't apply that lens when we look at a Presidential candidate who made a statement that speaks directly to those conversations.

[richard]

If there's ever an AE who uses the word "honestly" in every other post, it's me.

[ladybrienne]

Mar 31, 2019 10:28:06 GMT -6 doublestuf said:

Mar 31, 2019 10:19:54 GMT -6 ladybrienne said:

I’ve been posting here for a while. I love this place and I love the back and forth and how conversations like this have forced me to look inward and check myself, many times.

I have a problem with the delivery here, and nothing more than that. What I find annoying is that I actually agree with so much of what was said. I’ve said that now 800 times. If pointing out any other factor that could have had an impact on a person’s vote in 2016 besides the fact that they are a flaming racist or okay with a flaming racist and holding their nose while going to the ballot box makes it okay to put people in the extremist box when we have been posting with you for god knows how long, then I don’t know what I’m doing here.

In some ways I see your point. I just think that a white man running for President of our country following the dumpster-fire of Trump just cannot make statements like that.

And I agree with you there.

[miawallace]

For what it’s worth, I dislike Bill Maher a lot but he’s been delivering truth bombs past few weeks.
He’s awful, but we need that discenting voice. We really are not going to do well in an echo chamber of the same sentiments.
He’s offering a critical viewpoint and as irritating as he is, he’s right about some things and maybe we should consider those even if the source is annoying.