2020 Candidate Speculation

[byjove]

I think I could be jazzed about that too.

[athn64]

I would support a Warren/Castro ticket.

[catspajamas]

Very much here for Warren/Castro! FX.

[layloo]

Here for it!

[punker1212]

I just saw Castro’s endorsement and got really excited! I think I’m on a little bit of a different plane than lots of the folks here. I’m mostly excited by the democratic field of contenders. 2016 taught me the value of getting behind a candidate that isn’t perfect. Biden is the only candidate that I’m meh about. Anyway, even though my vote will likely go to Bernie, I love the idea of Warren/Castro and hope this gives her a good boost going in to next month!

[roloma]

My mom asked me again, after this, if I would consider caucusing for Liz and I had to pause. At this time (unless an official announcement about a running mate was made), I think I will still stick with caucusing for Booker. I am 97% sure he will not be viable in my precinct. If he is not, then I will move to Liz in hopes that we can help push her ahead of of one of the men in the top 4. This could all change if she were to announce Castro as her running mate prior to the caucus. I would probably start in their camp right from the jump. However, I am not sure if I would recommend making such an early declaration. That's been known to bite people in the ass, too.

[jaygee]

I think Castro being on the ticket is one of the only ways I would want to vote for Warren.

I won’t vote for her in the primary but if she ends up the nominee, I will vote for her. It will be a hold my nose vote unless someone with Castro’s policies and experience is on her ticket.

I think this endorsement is hugely symbolic for the “no white man” as a nominee contingent. I understand it in that light and think it is on brand for him. But other than that I’m kind like meh.

[coconutbacon]

Very excited to see the Castro endorsement of Warren. Warren/ Castro is a dream ticket for me!

[greykitty]

I read an article this morning extrapolating that if the early primaries don't show just one or two candidates holding a very strong lead over the others, primaries well past Super Tuesday could have way more impact than we've seen in the last few cycles.

Now I'm wondering if the Castro endorsement will help Warren gain more traction going into IA in particular. I read her last quarter's fundraising was falling behind, while Klobuchar was picking up. I wonder if some Warren supporters went toward Sanders? And if the Harris folks are just waiting it out a bit (which would be understandable to me).

And, of course, with the current international situation, everything could be even more unsettled heading into the primaries.

Transparency - I don't like Sanders at all in a presidential role and don't care that much for Warren's policies in general either.

[dc2london]

This is interesting

[dc2london]

Castro would be an interesting choice of running mate for Warren bc he is a progressive

[Ls2012]

Because of my broken and healing heart from my favorites dropping out, I'm going to withhold hope and judgement on that potential ticket until I hear that it is fact. I'm not sure I could handle getting excited about it only to be disappointed yet again.

[richard]

I fucking HATE that the only candidate running anti-Trump healthcare-focused ads in my market is Bloomberg.

Me seeing the commercial every time:

[starbuck]

Judge Judy is going all in for Bloom, eh?

[cnf]

Would vote for Warren/Castro

[jaygee]

Jan 6, 2020 17:34:45 GMT -6 richard said:

I fucking HATE that the only candidate running anti-Trump healthcare-focused ads in my market is Bloomberg.

Me seeing the commercial every time:

Same. Every. Damn. Time.

[punker1212]

Jan 6, 2020 15:00:21 GMT -6 dc2london said:

Castro would be an interesting choice of running mate for Warren bc he is a progressive

Touché. That matchup really defies conventional wisdom.

[cakewench]

[roloma]

I just saw that Warren and Castro are doing a town hall in my hometown in a few days. There is about a 29% (reported) Latinx population there, and probably higher actually. I find this verrrrrry interesting.


ETA: ldubhawksfan, in case you have anyone at home interested.

[ldubhawksfan]

Jan 7, 2020 9:04:27 GMT -6 roloma said:

I just saw that Warren and Castro are doing a town hall in my hometown in a few days. There is about a 29% (reported) Latinx population there, and probably higher actually. I find this verrrrrry interesting.


ETA: ldubhawksfan, in case you have anyone at home interested.

Eep! That is exciting! I will try to think of who back home might be interested and pass it on. Of course I would be if I were visiting! Thank you!

[Minerva]

Jan 7, 2020 7:59:44 GMT -6 cakewench said:

She really brought the thunder. 😂

[JukEboX]

Facebook' Andrew Bosworth says that Facebook got Trump elected in 2016 and it can and will happen again in 2020

"So was Facebook responsible for Donald Trump getting elected? I think the answer is yes, but not for the reasons anyone thinks," Bosworth wrote. "He didn't get elected because of Russia or misinformation or Cambridge Analytica. He got elected because he ran the single best digital ad campaign I've ever seen from any advertiser. Period."

"They weren't running misinformation or hoaxes. They weren't microtargeting or saying different things to different people. They just used the tools we had to show the right creative to each person," he wrote.

www.cnn.com/2020/01/07/tech/boz-trump-facebook/index.html

So Trump paid his tech people to micro target his base to scare them into hating others, convincing rural american's he can save farms, told urban people that he could bring back manufacturing jobs and used targeting data collected by Facebook based on income and location to target ads.

I can guarantee you D's aren't doing ANY of this. Ds are like the gramdfather who just learned how to use a cellphone.

Case in point. They are still running TV ads. I have yet to see a Ds add being used for targeting.

[Rebel]

I think Rs are realllllly good at messaging. They control the narrative and it feels like Ds are always on the defense.
Ex: Rs say they had to take out Solemani because he was a bad guy. Ds who are against the attack are traitors and don’t care about the safety of our country.
Rs are going to do tax cuts. Ds are going to tax you more for their programs. No mention by the Rs that tax cuts will just be for the rich.
Ds are going to take our guns. Doesn’t matter that the ONLY guy who wanted to do this is no longer in the race, it’s going to happen.
Rs want to make America great again. Ds don’t.

We are always on the defensive because Rs have their messaging DOWN.
I actually think this is a strength of both Warren and Castro- they are better at messaging than most Ds.

If we want a chance at winning this election, we have got to get in front of the narrative. We have to get in front of M4A and have clear and understandable benefits while showing it’s not going to cost the avg American a fortune. We have got to show we have an easy to follow plan to implement universal background checks without hindering lawful gun owners/buyers in their owning/purchasing. We have got to go on both offense and defense to be successful.

I agree with the point above that campaign ads on TV are almost useless for Dems. The only people I know who watch TV with commercials these days are over 50, almost all of whom are Rs.

If Dems want to GOTV, excite their base and get them angry enough to vote they are going to need to abandon TV ads and focus on FB, IG, Twitter and Pinterest ads. Their social media game has to be super strong and I’m just not sure a lot of the leading candidates are there. Booker + TikTok is awesome and we need more of that kind of thing (but maybe not TikTok, the avg user age is 13-21 and 60% of TikTok users live in China. But that type of fun video to make the candidate seem like a person is vital in this day and age).

I feel like up to now we have relied on “well we have the better candidate and they are actually a genuinely GOOD person so that’s all we need”. And it’s just not enough with Rs spinning the narrative the way they do.

That was a lot of rambling above. Hopefully it made a little sense lol

[dc2london]

I think Republicans just simply aren't afraid to exaggerate in order to stoke fear and hysteria.
Fear of guns being taken away.
Fear of a nanny state.
Fear of children being forced to become Muslim in school (yeah, it's a thing)
Fear of The Black Man.
Fear of "coerced, taxpayer funded abortions"
Fear of death panels.
Fear of violent criminals running free and violent gangs ruling the streets.
Fear of SO-SHULL-ISUM

None of that is true, but it doesn't stop incessant ads and batshit floor speeches

[dc2london]

And I'm in no way saying Democrats never exaggerate, extrapolate, catastrophize. But I think there's a huge difference between, "Science says climate change will eliminate Miamiif we don't act" and, "Those people want to ban cows are airplanes"

[starbuck]

I spoke to a republican today (excuse me, they prefer libertarian) who said that Tulsi stuck some language in a recent bill that reinforced the President cannot unilaterally declare war on Iran...something like "none of this should be construed to mean that the Pres can attack Iran." That's how they recalled it to me.

And Dem leadership took the language out of the bill, and this dude is calling it evidence that the Dems are just as corrupt and don't really GAF about the escalating tensions.

I didn't and still don't even know where to begin with this theory.

Taken this at face value, even if the language was in the bill, it would not have stopped anything because 45 does whatever reckless shit he wants.

But I really can't find information on what he was even talking about. He said some very left-leaning commentator put out a video talking about it. (Burr? Barr? I don't recall the name).

It was a weird conversation.

[elle]

Without sources, I'm inclined to think that's completely made up bs, possibly something originating with or being pushed by Russian/whoever bots starbuck.

Especially because if that were the case, Tulsi herself would be all over the place shouting about it from the rooftops because she loves to point out that Dems are "just as corrupt" as the GOP.

[punker1212]

Jan 7, 2020 16:39:18 GMT -6 dc2london said:

I think Republicans just simply aren't afraid to exaggerate in order to stoke fear and hysteria.
Fear of guns being taken away.
Fear of a nanny state.
Fear of children being forced to become Muslim in school (yeah, it's a thing)
Fear of The Black Man.
Fear of "coerced, taxpayer funded abortions"
Fear of death panels.
Fear of violent criminals running free and violent gangs ruling the streets.
Fear of SO-SHULL-ISUM

None of that is true, but it doesn't stop incessant ads and batshit floor speeches

Yes, but really what Trump did so well was play up the struggles of working Americans, and give them scapegoats. Unfortunately it  worked so well in part because of the  strong history of racism and misogyny in our culture. Fox "news"  has been pivotal in this  being so  effective.

I think this is the pull of Sanders, and that he HAS been pretty effective at identifying the struggles of working Americans. People can say  that they're different sides of the same coin, but  if Democrats ignore this, they  aren't hearing the struggle of voters,  and they need to. 

[punker1212]

I stopped by to share this article:

www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/7/21002895/bernie-sanders-2020-electability

Shared with me by my brother, who is a an Obama-esque incrementalist. Have not yet read myself, but am about to. I'd be interested in hearing others' responses to it.

[elle]

I just went down a rabbit hole (thanks a lot starbuck, lol) and even watched a clip of Tulsi on Fox News. And now I find myself in the strange position of agreeing with what she said in that clip. What's missing though is her talking about having added language to a bill that would prevent Trump from going to war with Iran, which was later removed. If that's indeed what happened, why wouldn't she mention it since she clearly thinks the escalating tensions with Iran are a serious national security threat? 🤔