Is Kirsten Gillibrand the most electable female democrat in 2020?

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Discuss.

[Fuzzy Bear]

No.  Claire McCaskill is, provided she gets herself re-elected.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

"Most electable" in terms of general widespread appeal - I'd have her 2nd, behind Klobuchar.

Klobuchar's agenda and voting history is consistent, whereas Gillibrand has a history of switching from a Blue Dog Democrat persona to a Progressive overnight - which could turn away some voters, and is something I think her opponents will use against her in 2020 if she runs.

[Lord Admirale]

Gillibrand the opportunist? No way.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Gillibrand is a poor man's Hillary Clinton (and Booker is a poor man's Obama).

Not to mention she's super boring. Her speeches could compete with ambien.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

Gillibrand the opportunist? No way.

"It's not trendhopping, it's called 'being dynamic'!"

[NYSforKennedy2024]

Gillibrand is a poor man's Hillary Clinton (and Booker is a poor man's Obama).

Not to mention she's super boring. Her speeches could compete with ambien.

So Atlas has agreed to Gillibrand - Clinton, Booker - Obama, but who is Harris and Warren?

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

So Atlas has agreed to Gillibrand - Clinton, Booker - Obama, but who is Harris and Warren?

Harris is a wanna be Obama:

- Mixed race
- From a blue state with a ton of electoral votes
- One term but it's not even finished
- Would be first female President

There are a few differences: she's too old (Harris will be 56 in 2020; Obama was 47 in 2008), she's not as great a speaker and less likable compared to Obama.

Warren is a joke lol. A punch line.

[NYSforKennedy2024]

So Atlas has agreed to Gillibrand - Clinton, Booker - Obama, but who is Harris and Warren?

Harris is a wanna be Obama:

- Mixed race
- From a blue state with a ton of electoral votes
- One term but it's not even finished
- Would be first female President

There are a few differences: she's too old (Harris will be 56 in 2020; Obama was 47 in 2008), she's not as great a speaker and less likable compared to Obama.

Warren is a joke lol. A punch line.

I give it to the progressives who aren't buying her lies, though. Both the lies of Gillibrand, Harris, and Warren - actually. All say they are progressive grassroots Democrats but they're funded by corporations and donors left and right.

[Dr. Arch]

I actually think Klobuchar and Baldwin might be a step above her.

[i4indyguy]

Not only would I prefer Klobuchar to Gillibrand, I feel that the most electable democrats must be able to speak to working class/union type voters, and for that reason I think people like Sen. Brown or Klobuchar are better bets to perform in the EC.

[Mr. Smith]

So Atlas has agreed to Gillibrand - Clinton, Booker - Obama, but who is Harris and Warren?

Harris is a wanna be Obama:

- Mixed race
- From a blue state with a ton of electoral votes
- One term but it's not even finished
- Would be first female President

There are a few differences: she's too old (Harris will be 56 in 2020; Obama was 47 in 2008), she's not as great a speaker and less likable compared to Obama.

Warren is a joke lol. A punch line.

So was Slick Willie, so was Trump, Jimmy Who? was a thing too.  Even Obama was a laughing stock by your ilk initially.

Moral: Punch lines win.

[TheSaint250]

Warren is a wanna be Sanders.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

When did Gillibrand gain all this popularity on atlas?  I feel Klobuchar, Harris & Warren are all much better/stronger options for a female Democrat to win.  Each for their own reasons; they have unique appeals that could build winning coalitions.  Not sure what winning coalition Gillibrand would build.

I feel like Gillibrand is the strongest candidate to beat a President Pence, not a President Trump now that I think about it.

[Mr. Morden]

Gillibrand is a poor man's Hillary Clinton (and Booker is a poor man's Obama).

Not to mention she's super boring. Her speeches could compete with ambien.

So Atlas has agreed to Gillibrand - Clinton, Booker - Obama, but who is Harris and Warren?

I don't really agree that Gillibrand is an analog to Clinton.  In some ways, sure.  But in others, Klobuchar is more Clinton-like.

I continue to wonder how Gillibrand's "gender essentialist" outlook (if we use the NY Magazine profile's framing of it: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/kirsten-gillibrand-progressive-champion-2020-run.html ) is going to play with the electorate.  To quote from that article:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can imagine that kind of talk helping her in the primary, but it seems risky in the GE.  I mean, I think she will have to shift her issue focus and how she frames issues if she's going to launch a presidential campaign, because if presidential candidate Gillibrand is the same as Senator Gillibrand, then she risks being painted as the identity politics candidate for women*....which is not the best place to be if you also need the votes of men.

* Kamala had a good line in the Tea Leaves thread: "Gillibrand is basically EMILY's List if it were a person."

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

When did Gillibrand gain all this popularity on atlas?  I feel Klobuchar, Harris & Warren are all much better/stronger options for a female Democrat to win.  Each for their own reasons; they have unique appeals that could build winning coalitions.  Not sure what winning coalition Gillibrand would build.

In terms of Democrats that can both appeal to rural and working class voters and upper class suburbs, she's proven herself to be the one that can do that more than any other Democrat.

[MissoulaDem]

Klobuchar would definitely be better than Gillibrand (and probably the best option the Dems have) but there are other women in the party who are more electable such as; Maggie Hassan (under rated really would be better placed in the VP spot), Tammy Baldwin, Elizabeth Warren etc.

[Figueira]

Gillibrand is a poor man's Hillary Clinton (and Booker is a poor man's Obama).

Not to mention she's super boring. Her speeches could compete with ambien.

No, Gillibrand is much younger than Clinton, which is a bigger deal than people think.

[Possiblymaybe]

Not only would I prefer Klobuchar to Gillibrand, I feel that the most electable democrats must be able to speak to working class/union type voters, and for that reason I think people like Sen. Brown or Klobuchar are better bets to perform in the EC.

You have to be able to speak to both wwc and poc voters.  Brown has proven he can. But klobuchar?

[henster]

Gillibrand is a poor man's Hillary Clinton (and Booker is a poor man's Obama).

Not to mention she's super boring. Her speeches could compete with ambien.

No, Gillibrand is much younger than Clinton, which is a bigger deal than people think.

In addition being more telegenic, but really what makes them so similar besides sharing the same seat? KG seems way more real to me than HRC ever was, you can tell when she supports something she really does and is passionate about it. While HRC seemed so fake to so many people. I guess her biggest vice so far seems to be the flip flopping blue dog to progressive and Wall St. ties.

[Kamala]

Gillibrand is a poor man's Hillary Clinton (and Booker is a poor man's Obama).

Not to mention she's super boring. Her speeches could compete with ambien.

No, Gillibrand is much younger than Clinton, which is a bigger deal than people think.

In addition being more telegenic, but really what makes them so similar besides sharing the same seat? KG seems way more real to me than HRC ever was, you can tell when she supports something she really does and is passionate about it. While HRC seemed so fake to so many people. I guess her biggest vice so far seems to be the flip flopping blue dog to progressive and Wall St. ties.

Gillibrand is also a lot less cautious, I guess, than Clinton. Clinton, naturally, developed a sort of distrust of the media and so comes across as cold, calculated, and artificial, out of fear of making a wrong move. Gillibrand hasn't been subjected to the same quarter-century of smears and intrusion into every aspect of her life, and so is a lot more open and natural than Clinton. The thing is, Clinton in private is by many accounts a very sharp and funny person. Gillibrand is sharp and funny publicly.

[AN63093]

Probably yes.

A more charismatic Klobuchar would probably be ahead of her though.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Clinton-lite is not very electable if the actual Clinton couldn't beat a celebrity tv host.

[varesurgent]

Gillibrand has none of Clinton's baggage (real or imagined). That's huge as she'd be able to assemble the same coalition and then add to it as moderate suburbanites (especially the women) would have less reason to wander to Trump.

I like Klobuchar and I think she'd be a good candidate.  Rather a foil to Trump -- what character attacks can Trump lobby on her?  Perhaps a bit dry?

Warren is probably less electable simply because of the antipathy she's already garnered.

McCaskill would do well, too, but no chance she runs.  Can't do a competitive Senate race and then turn around and immediately run for president.

There are a lot of ways in which Harris can be attacked, some legitimate, but most dog-whistley.  Being rather inexperienced and far to the left wouldn't help, though I'd like to see a former prosecutor go after Trump during a debate

[Da2017]

Gillibrand has none of Clinton's baggage (real or imagined). That's huge as she'd be able to assemble the same coalition and then add to it as moderate suburbanites (especially the women) would have less reason to wander to Trump.

I like Klobuchar and I think she'd be a good candidate.  Rather a foil to Trump -- what character attacks can Trump lobby on her?  Perhaps a bit dry?

Warren is probably less electable simply because of the antipathy she's already garnered.

McCaskill would do well, too, but no chance she runs.  Can't do a competitive Senate race and then turn around and immediately run for president.

There are a lot of ways in which Harris can be attacked, some legitimate, but most dog-whistley.  Being rather inexperienced and far to the left wouldn't help, though I'd like to see a former prosecutor go after Trump during a debate

I like Gillibrand and Harris. I can't find any baggage for Gillibrand. From what I've read on Gillibrand she is less guarded than Hillary. Agree on Harris. Most of Harris's baggage will be from her Attorney general days.Still Harris is far more charismatic than Hillary. Both don't have anywhere near the baggage real or imagined that Clinton did.