The “Who is running in 2020?” tea leaves thread, Part 3

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Bernie and Warren met and both are probably running.

Warren should bow out of the race and endorse Sanders, so the Progressive wing of the party is united behind one candidate. The Pocahontas smear combined with her embarrassing DNA test shows she would be torn apart by Trump, plus Sanders has a much more enthusiastic base and a much more authentic message (before Sanders ran, Single-Payer healthcare, Free College, and a Living Wage were viewed as fringe positions by most Democrats) as shown by the fact that every other potential candidate is imitating his platform, even those that clearly don’t support it (ie. Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, and Beto). This proves Sanders is the candidate that Progressives should unite behind to win the nomination and throw Trump out of the White House.

Even if Warren endorsed him, Sanders still wouldn't win the nomination. I would expect Clinton level shenanigans from the other candidates (like refusing to attend debates he is invited to) if he runs.

The Clinton level shenanigans is exactly the reason why she lost.

She lost because she had flaws that were unique to her as a candidate (Whitewater, helping cover up Bill's sexual indiscretions, email scandal) not because of any particular strength of a proposed Sanders candidacy.

Without Bernie Sanders, i would've been probably a Clinton supporter as i initially was, and i even preferred Trump over her on election day, because i was so done with all the shenanigance / rigging process.

No-one cares about the e-mails, except Trump trolls, and i don't even know what Whitewater is. But the Sanders / and rigged primaries weren't the only reason that she lost (and Wikileaks didn't help Trump, she should have been made clear that Wikileaks had never something to leak about her, Assange is a hero). Her arrogant and naive campaign is part of the reason why she lost as well. She was never able to connect with the average person, and while some reluctantly went for her, it wasn't enough to make up for the Trump enthusiasm surge on election day, especially in the Rust Belt which might be more prone to voting for populist candidates (as Ventura proved in 1998 in MN already).

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

[JG]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

I'm not sure a two white male tickets would play well with the base. Something like that shows how disconnected Biden is.

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

The rest of that story is about Biden questioning whether he’s too old, and the same old stuff about how on the one hand he plays up the chance that he’ll run, but on the other, he’s still bringing up whether it’s the best choice for his family:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other news, Klobuchar asked about 2020 at about the 5 minute mark in this video:

https://www.msnbc.com/andrea-mitchell-reports/watch/sen-klobuchar-on-bipartisan-accomplishment-combating-sexual-harassment-1398139459997

and she says “I am considering this” (meaning a run for president), and then goes into a her Midwestern identity politics spiel.

[henster]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

Seems like a lot of hubris from Biden thinking people will bend over backwards to be his VP through the primary. I have no idea why Beto or any other major candidate would hitch onto a Biden ticket.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

Seems like a lot of hubris from Biden thinking people will bend over backwards to be his VP through the primary. I have no idea why Beto or any other major candidate would hitch onto a Biden ticket.

In 2016, Biden wanted Warren as his running mate. Just LOL at Biden.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/joe-biden-elizabeth-warren-223104

[gottsu]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

That dog won't hunt with Democrats. Female would be much more preferred.

[Illini Moderate]

Bernie and Warren met and both are probably running.

Warren should bow out of the race and endorse Sanders, so the Progressive wing of the party is united behind one candidate. The Pocahontas smear combined with her embarrassing DNA test shows she would be torn apart by Trump, plus Sanders has a much more enthusiastic base and a much more authentic message (before Sanders ran, Single-Payer healthcare, Free College, and a Living Wage were viewed as fringe positions by most Democrats) as shown by the fact that every other potential candidate is imitating his platform, even those that clearly don’t support it (ie. Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, and Beto). This proves Sanders is the candidate that Progressives should unite behind to win the nomination and throw Trump out of the White House.

Even if Warren endorsed him, Sanders still wouldn't win the nomination. I would expect Clinton level shenanigans from the other candidates (like refusing to attend debates he is invited to) if he runs.

The Clinton level shenanigans is exactly the reason why she lost.

She lost because she had flaws that were unique to her as a candidate (Whitewater, helping cover up Bill's sexual indiscretions, email scandal) not because of any particular strength of a proposed Sanders candidacy.

Without Bernie Sanders, i would've been probably a Clinton supporter as i initially was, and i even preferred Trump over her on election day, because i was so done with all the shenanigance / rigging process.

No-one cares about the e-mails, except Trump trolls, and i don't even know what Whitewater is. But the Sanders / and rigged primaries weren't the only reason that she lost (and Wikileaks didn't help Trump, she should have been made clear that Wikileaks had never something to leak about her, Assange is a hero). Her arrogant and naive campaign is part of the reason why she lost as well. She was never able to connect with the average person, and while some reluctantly went for her, it wasn't enough to make up for the Trump enthusiasm surge on election day, especially in the Rust Belt which might be more prone to voting for populist candidates (as Ventura proved in 1998 in MN already).

The fact that you preferred Donald Trump over Hillary when you identify as a socialist is mind boggling.That is just so illogical from a policy standpoint.

First of all, the primaries were not "rigged". Yes there were fewer debates, and maybe there should have been more, but that does not constitute "rigging". For one, the rules of the debates were decided in 2014, far before anyone knew the race would be Sanders v. Clinton. Also, Bernie Sanders was extremely well known among Democratic voters by the time voting was in swing. Democrats knew what his message was (as he was excellent at staying on message) they just chose not to vote for him by a significant margin.

The claim that Assange is a hero is straight up laughable. Yes he leaked some things back in the day in the interest of transparency, as opposed to present day leaking of innocent people's social security numbers, addresses, and phone numbers. But Wikileaks' goal this election was purely focused on sowing divide and discord in the American electorate. Hell, they were even encouraging Trump not to concede as it would be "far more interesting" in their DM's to Don Jr. They also refused to leak any damaging info on Trump and solely focused on Clinton as they believed she would win and wanted to hurt her as much as possible before she became President. Wikileaks provided absolutely no value by leaking PRIVATE emails from John Podesta. People do have a right to privacy, and there's no reason the American people needed to see those--completely uninteresting and irrelevant--emails.

Yes Clinton's campaign was arrogant and it is largely the campaign's failure to get out ahead of scandals and present a clear and simplified message to the American people that cost them the election, but let's not act like she wasn't subject to unprecedented attacks from a foreign government. And pretending that as a socialist, Trump at all served your interests any better is laughable. 

[President Johnson]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

I'm not sure a two white male tickets would play well with the base. Something like that shows how disconnected Biden is.

I don't think a lot of people actually care. The base is energized enough in their desire to throw Trump out of office. Nevertheless, I think Biden shouldn't run for other reasons.

[gottsu]

https://twitter.com/amanbatheja/status/1073709813123739648

I'm not sure a two white male tickets would play well with the base. Something like that shows how disconnected Biden is.

I think Biden shouldn't run for other reasons.

So what are your reasons?

[NewYorkExpress]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/15/politics/gillibrand-2020-van-jones-cnntv/index.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

Eric Holder suddenly endorses Medicare for All, for some reason.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/15/eric-holder-democrats-obamacare-ruling-medicare/

[Joey1996]

Eric Holder suddenly endorses Medicare for All, for some reason.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/15/eric-holder-democrats-obamacare-ruling-medicare/

He actually framed this endorsement really well

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Eric Holder suddenly endorses Medicare for All, for some reason.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/15/eric-holder-democrats-obamacare-ruling-medicare/

Next you know, he'll suddenly endorse investigating Robert Rubin for lying about subprime mortgages.

Just kidding, that won't happen.

[wbrocks67]

A Biden/Beto ticket in *theory* is an amazing idea, but when you start thinking about the Democratic base and it being two White men, then it becomes a not great idea.

[Mr. Morden]

Sherrod Brown holding "online town hall" today at 4pm Eastern:

https://www.facebook.com/events/942516049282202/
https://www.wkbn.com/news/ohio/democrat-sherrod-brown-mulling-2020-sets-online-town-hall/1661358415

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[aaroncd107]

Solid profile on Mayor Pete

https://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/pete-buttigieg-has-his-eye-on-the-prize/

[Spiffy]

Solid profile on Mayor Pete

https://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/pete-buttigieg-has-his-eye-on-the-prize/

I really like Mayor Pete and hope he runs for Congress or gets a position in the next Democratic administration.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Bernie and Warren met and both are probably running.

Warren should bow out of the race and endorse Sanders, so the Progressive wing of the party is united behind one candidate. The Pocahontas smear combined with her embarrassing DNA test shows she would be torn apart by Trump, plus Sanders has a much more enthusiastic base and a much more authentic message (before Sanders ran, Single-Payer healthcare, Free College, and a Living Wage were viewed as fringe positions by most Democrats) as shown by the fact that every other potential candidate is imitating his platform, even those that clearly don’t support it (ie. Harris, Booker, Gillibrand, and Beto). This proves Sanders is the candidate that Progressives should unite behind to win the nomination and throw Trump out of the White House.

Even if Warren endorsed him, Sanders still wouldn't win the nomination. I would expect Clinton level shenanigans from the other candidates (like refusing to attend debates he is invited to) if he runs.

The Clinton level shenanigans is exactly the reason why she lost.

She lost because she had flaws that were unique to her as a candidate (Whitewater, helping cover up Bill's sexual indiscretions, email scandal) not because of any particular strength of a proposed Sanders candidacy.

Without Bernie Sanders, i would've been probably a Clinton supporter as i initially was, and i even preferred Trump over her on election day, because i was so done with all the shenanigance / rigging process.

No-one cares about the e-mails, except Trump trolls, and i don't even know what Whitewater is. But the Sanders / and rigged primaries weren't the only reason that she lost (and Wikileaks didn't help Trump, she should have been made clear that Wikileaks had never something to leak about her, Assange is a hero). Her arrogant and naive campaign is part of the reason why she lost as well. She was never able to connect with the average person, and while some reluctantly went for her, it wasn't enough to make up for the Trump enthusiasm surge on election day, especially in the Rust Belt which might be more prone to voting for populist candidates (as Ventura proved in 1998 in MN already).

The fact that you preferred Donald Trump over Hillary when you identify as a socialist is mind boggling.That is just so illogical from a policy standpoint.

First of all, the primaries were not "rigged". Yes there were fewer debates, and maybe there should have been more, but that does not constitute "rigging". For one, the rules of the debates were decided in 2014, far before anyone knew the race would be Sanders v. Clinton. Also, Bernie Sanders was extremely well known among Democratic voters by the time voting was in swing. Democrats knew what his message was (as he was excellent at staying on message) they just chose not to vote for him by a significant margin.

The claim that Assange is a hero is straight up laughable. Yes he leaked some things back in the day in the interest of transparency, as opposed to present day leaking of innocent people's social security numbers, addresses, and phone numbers. But Wikileaks' goal this election was purely focused on sowing divide and discord in the American electorate. Hell, they were even encouraging Trump not to concede as it would be "far more interesting" in their DM's to Don Jr. They also refused to leak any damaging info on Trump and solely focused on Clinton as they believed she would win and wanted to hurt her as much as possible before she became President. Wikileaks provided absolutely no value by leaking PRIVATE emails from John Podesta. People do have a right to privacy, and there's no reason the American people needed to see those--completely uninteresting and irrelevant--emails.

Yes Clinton's campaign was arrogant and it is largely the campaign's failure to get out ahead of scandals and present a clear and simplified message to the American people that cost them the election, but let's not act like she wasn't subject to unprecedented attacks from a foreign government. And pretending that as a socialist, Trump at all served your interests any better is laughable.  

I'm sorry and I already know I was wrong there, but as a socialist you can't support both Trump and Clinton. Preferring Trump over Clinton in 2016 was a mistake (i did it back than, but i don't anymore), but I can't help it that Clinton wasn't a president for the WWC. Trump at least could have became a WWC president, but he turned out not to be. And I might live in Belgium, but i'm sure tons of people in the Rust Belt thought about it the same way as i did. You can't blame me for not supporting HRC after that terrible primary process.

[Cold War Liberal]

Solid profile on Mayor Pete

https://www.indianapolismonthly.com/features/pete-buttigieg-has-his-eye-on-the-prize/

I really like Mayor Pete and hope he runs for Congress or gets a position in the next Democratic administration.

[Mr. Morden]

Interview with Booker here:

http://www.philly.com/news/cory-booker-presidency-single-man-20181214.html

He says he’ll consult with friends and family over the holidays, which include a visit to early caucus state Nevada.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[RogueBeaver]

https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1074693862856237058

[Mr. Morden]

https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1074693862856237058

Well then, I guess he's running for president, because there's no other compelling reason not to run for another term.  Also:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/south-bend-mayor-pete-buttigieg-moves-toward-presidential-run/2018/12/17/e51930a2-fe5e-11e8-ad40-cdfd0e0dd65a_story.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A presidential announcement also might not come right away in 2019, because he has a book coming out in February, and may want to do the book tour before officially becoming a candidate.

[NewYorkExpress]

https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1074693862856237058

Well then, I guess he's running for president, because there's no other compelling reason not to run for another term.  Also:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/south-bend-mayor-pete-buttigieg-moves-toward-presidential-run/2018/12/17/e51930a2-fe5e-11e8-ad40-cdfd0e0dd65a_story.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A presidential announcement also might not come right away in 2019, because he has a book coming out in February, and may want to do the book tour before officially becoming a candidate.

Indiana does have a Gubernatorial Election in 2020, so he might end up running for that office instead.

[Mr. Morden]

Indiana does have a Gubernatorial Election in 2020, so he might end up running for that office instead.

But he hasn't given any indication that he's interested in that, yet has given indication that he might be interested in a presidential run.  I figure it was either the presidency or another run for mayor.  So if he's not running for mayor, then I guess it's the presidency by default.